Atheistforums.com

News & General Discussion => News Stories and Current Events => Topic started by: Mr.Obvious on January 27, 2020, 06:37:30 AM

Title: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Mr.Obvious on January 27, 2020, 06:37:30 AM
Election coming up in the USA, again.
And while our politicians back here in Belgium seem intent to break their own world-record of taking the longest time ever to form a federal government, I thought it might be interesting to try and follow the 2020 election.

We'll get to see, of course. And I am a layman. And I have more oft than not been wrong about these things. (Thought Hillary would win last time, though I honestly probably wouldn't have voted for her.) But I do think that Trump is going to take the crown again, this time around. I don't really think he's a good president, but I do think he's going to win.

What do you guys think?

I'm trying to look up some information on the other candidates, republican, democrat and otherwise. Who do you think will win? Who might have a shot? Who would you prefer?
I'm trying to read up on Andrew Yang right now.
Title: Re: The big 'ol 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on January 27, 2020, 09:09:33 AM
I haven't followed this too closely.  I think Trump is a bad president.  He's thoughtless, reactionary, and doesn't seem to think ahead. He strikes me as the classical epitome of the loose cannon.  None of the democratic challengers have done much to inspire me, however.  The front runner Biden strikes me as another Hillary, with strong Democratic credentials, but not interested in taking the country anywhere.   I see him more as a fixture than a leader.  Whose that guy that wants to give everyone $1000 a month?  Was he put in the debates as a trial balloon to evaluate the power of strange thinking?  It worked for Trump.  Maybe the Party is just testing the waters.

So who will win?  Trump does have wildly strong support from voters, even if it's not a majority of voters.  Predicting a win for Democrats is hard.  My feeling is that Democrats are becoming disenfranchised with their choices, and with their party in general which seems to be drifting to the right.  If the country is drifting to the right and the party is trying to reflect that, then so be it.  But I don't think most of the Democratic base is drifting to the right, which means they can't match the enthusiasm of the Trumpsters, and that will hurt the party in 2020.

It will be interesting to observe, maybe not as interesting as the Superbowl half time show, but of marginal  interest to outsiders.  Citizens of Belgium, Scotland, USA, we are not part of the ruling class.  We are outsiders.
Title: Re: The big 'ol 2020 debate
Post by: Mr.Obvious on January 27, 2020, 10:19:43 AM
Yeah, so that is Andrew Yang, the guy I'm currently reading up on, who promises the Universal Basic Income of 1000 dollars a month.
Not a horrible idea, depending on how you follow up on it. Here in Belgium we have something similar. But it's more around 625 euros a month for someone who lives together with another adult, with money taken out if the other person is a partner or parent who has an income of over 625 his- or herself. About 910 euros for anyone 18+ living on their own. And about 1250 euro's for anyone who has children (younger than 18) living with them.

For example:
Jack age 26 lives with partner Jill age 25. Jack has no job and no rights to unemployment wellfare or any other income. Jill is unemployed and receives 1000 euro's out of unemployment welfare, a month.  Jack can get about 250 euro's out of 'leefloon', which is what we call the local equivalent of UBI (as I understand it).
Later, Jill finds a new job. Because she has a partner to take care for, her income is a little bit higher than that of a single person working would be. She goes to an income of 1000 up to 1600 euro's a month, netto.  Jack's right to 'Leefloon' stops right there.
Later, Jill gets sick and tired of carrying around Jack and decides to leave his broke ass. She moves out. Jack, still without an income, can get 910 euro's per month.
Later, Jill finds out she's pregnant. Her job finds out too and quickly fires her but give a different reason. Jill moves back in with Jack, cuz he the baby-daddy. The income reverts back to the beginning of the example.
After a few  missed appointments at the VDAB (a bureau which helps people find jobs) and her union (which defend her rights as an unemployed person looking for a job), she receives a sanction  and loses her unemployment welfare, temporarily. During that sanction time, they both are able to receive 625 euros, each.
Still during the sanction, Jill gives birth to a baby boy. The right to 'leefloon' turns into a single right of 1250 euro, going to one of the two parents.

The actual numbers differ slightly and I rounded them for the explanation. And there are small exemptions of income, which make it so that when Jack and  Jill had leefloon and unemployment welfare, they are slightly better off than when they both got leefloon.

I actually work for the organisation that gives out the leefloon in Flanders. It is an important last resort for an income. Especially when bureaucratic problems or anomalies or unfair situations strip someone of an income. Of course the drawback is that there will always be people who either try  to abuse the system  and work non-registered jobs on the side or simply try to get that money and not do anything for it and just wallow in poverty. But I could give plenty of examples to point out the necessity for this safety-net in our Belgian society. You just need good social workers to on the one hand help guide those who need leefloon to a better future, guard those who can't and activate and sanction those who can but won't.
Important to note though, it's not just, 'everyone gets cash'. It's, 'we make sure everyone has the bare minimum of cash to get by another month and if they don't have that, we intervene'. Of course I'm not 100% read up on Yang's proposal.
Title: Re: The big 'ol 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on January 27, 2020, 10:43:04 AM
Mr Obvious, you want to follow the 2020 US election?  It should be obvious to you that you should make an appointment with your doctor for a checkup!

Observation for non-Americans.  Iowa + New Hampshire plus states in Super Tuesday … is pretty much it.  A hung D convention is unlikely.  Whoever Bloomberg supports, will get plenty of free media.  Trump didn't even have to pay for it in 2016.  It is a conspiracy theory that Hillary will use the super-delegates to become the nominee.  FBI, CIA etc already have their hooks into Buttigieg just in case he gets traction.  All candidates who have a chance, are invited to watch the Zapruder film!

Socialist vs identity grifter is no contest in the US.  The US is pragmatic, not ideological.  If you say .. All Blacks To Be Released From Jail … will get lots of Black votes.  All College Students With Loans Get Their Loans Forgiven … will get lots of Millennial votes.  Elections here are about buying votes and dirty tricks.  Conservatives are more like Liberals than they admit,  both are American.  They just want a different corruption of the Electorate.  Candidate A … will give you $1000.  Voter …. so I have a greater offer to buy my vote?  Candidate B … will give you $2000!  Thatcher comes to mind.
Title: Re: The big 'ol 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on January 27, 2020, 11:21:42 AM
Yeah, so that is Andrew Yang, the guy I'm currently reading up on, who promises the Universal Basic Income of 1000 dollars a month.
Not a horrible idea, depending on how you follow up on it. Here in Belgium we have something similar.
I just heard Yang say that in a debate.  I haven't read his proposal, but I don't think it's similar to what you describe, which sounds more like unemployment combined with welfare benefits given to people who need them.  Yang just wants to give everyone $1000 whether you are a homeless person, or a CEO making 2 billion dollars.  I'm not going to claim that's what he actually proposes.  It's only what I heard him say once.  And most of all I'd never make the claim that he has a snowball's chance of getting it passed.
Title: Re: The big 'ol 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on January 27, 2020, 01:50:55 PM
I'm just waiting to see who the Democrats' nominee will be. No sense in getting all worked up for anyone until then.

That being said, I've listened to Bernie Sanders for years on Thom Hartmann's program, every Friday, in the segment called "Brunch with Bernie." He's been consistent all this time, and I like his positions on policy. 
Title: Re: The big 'ol 2020 debate
Post by: Mr.Obvious on January 27, 2020, 05:16:51 PM
I just heard Yang say that in a debate.  I haven't read his proposal, but I don't think it's similar to what you describe, which sounds more like unemployment combined with welfare benefits given to people who need them.  Yang just wants to give everyone $1000 whether you are a homeless person, or a CEO making 2 billion dollars.  I'm not going to claim that's what he actually proposes.  It's only what I heard him say once.  And most of all I'd never make the claim that he has a snowball's chance of getting it passed.

Wow, looked further into it. You're right, he does just want to give everyone a thousand dollars a month.
That's... Not gonna help people, I think.
Title: Re: The big 'ol 2020 debate
Post by: Mike Cl on January 27, 2020, 09:11:27 PM
Wow, looked further into it. You're right, he does just want to give everyone a thousand dollars a month.
That's... Not gonna help people, I think.
I do not have any sites to direct you to right now, but Oakland, CA has a pilot program underway in which they gave a select number of families a fixed income for 2 years--no strings attached.  Finland I think just finished up one such program.  And I think the idea of a universal fixed income is gaining traction.  And I think the reaction so far has been positive.  Personally, I kind of like the idea.
Title: Re: The big 'ol 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on January 27, 2020, 09:13:31 PM
I haven't really a strong preference any way yet; my first choice has dropped out already, and with woomistress Williamson out of the race, I could be anywhere from fairly to quite happy voting for any of the rest of them.  Every single one represents some to much improvement over the current occupant.

Anyway, I had been a Castro supporter because I wanted someone with White House experience that wasn't ten years past the normal retirement age.  Also, on a purely power-politics level, he had the potential to shake up the vote in Texas (or at least make Republicans work a little harder there than they might otherwise have to), as well as boosting Hispanic/Latino turnout, which has never been high, lagging far behind Caucasian and African-American turnout.  And I would have put money on Donnieboy saying something appallingly racist (not that his base cares, but fuck them, I want the independents and disenchanted Republicans who vote) during the campaign, and possibly even during the debates.

I'm not leaning any particular way right now.

Part of me wants to vote Buttigieg, whose intelligence impresses me, but I think needs a little more experience before he's ready for the presidency; he might be a wildcard pick for the VP slot, especially if an East Coaster gets the nomination.

I've always liked Bernie's politics, but his style leaves something to be desired (like tact and flexibility), and his age is strongly against him, especially if he's already having cardiac issues on the campaign trail.  And, let's be honest, he's still not a registered Democrat, he's just running as one.

Joe's a safe bet, but he's not an exciting one, and isn't really offering to be anything more than "Not Don".

I like Warren's vision, and she's an engaging speaker -- I got to see her campaigning for Hillary in '16 and  she left me wondering why she wasn't the nominee.  And I like Klobuchar's pragmatism, although she's not as inspiring on the campaign trail.  She has the potential to be an Angela Merkel-style figure, running more or less as 'mommy' (which has worked unquestionably well for "Mutti" Merkel, certainly).

Yang is another bright 'un, although he's got that same lack-of-experience thing going on, and I'm gunshy of businesspeople thinking they can be President.  The three primarily-businessmen that have already taken the office -- Hoover, Bush Jr and Donnieboy (all Republicans, of course) -- are three of the worst presidents in American history.  The same brush applies to Bloomberg; being mayor of New York City is certainly experience of a higher order than some governorships, but -- businessman.  Worse, he looks like he's trying to buy the nomination.  He probably is -- $45 billion is a pretty damn deep pocket, but the appearance of doing it is what's probably going to hurt more.

The last thing to remember is that barring monumental coattails this November, whoever's elected is going to preside over a closely divided government.  All the vision in the world isn't going to help Warren or Sanders get some of their proposals past a Congress that doesn't reflect their views.  The Republicans are Stepford wives and will automatically oppose en bloc anything said by a Democrat, even if it's objectively non-controversial.  The Democrats are like herding cats.  I posted on a different forum the following observations, in response to someone who was pushing the "Bernie or Bust" line:

Quote from: trdsf
First, without a supportive Congress, very little of the progressive agenda is going to happen.

Second, this is a process, not a destination. We don’t need Bernie so much as we need thousands more like him, and AOC, and Warren, and so on all across the country.

And third, don’t let perfect get in the way of better. We have 40 years of right-wing madness to untangle, and that’s not going to happen in just one election.

Defeating Trump and Pence this fall is only the excision of the main tumor.  We need political chemotherapy for decades to rid ourselves of the cancer of modern Republicanism.
Title: Re: The big 'ol 2020 debate
Post by: Mr.Obvious on January 28, 2020, 02:16:26 AM
I do not have any sites to direct you to right now, but Oakland, CA has a pilot program underway in which they gave a select number of families a fixed income for 2 years--no strings attached.  Finland I think just finished up one such program.  And I think the idea of a universal fixed income is gaining traction.  And I think the reaction so far has been positive.  Personally, I kind of like the idea.

I'll look into it, because it does interest me,. But I have initial points of doubt.
1. A minimum income through welfare is necessary. But in Belgium our social safety net is already one of the more expensive ones and let's say at least half of our clients get less than 1000 a month.
2. Those who do get more than 1000 a month really need it (example, single parents) and I don't think you'll be able to keep up ubi and welfare together. In fact I already read you'd need to pick to apply to one or another.
3. You're going to have to absorb the welfare programs to at least cover part of the cost. (and maybe even unemployment benefits or other social incomes, because that's going to be one massive cost.) So that would mean a subsection vulnareable people might get a lot less each month. (at least if it were in Belgium, I don't know welfare rates in the states)
4. Assuming they're not just printing the money extra, because that's wreck the economy, they're going to have to a this through higher taxes, because this is going to cost a lot more than the welfare program(s). Now higher taxes in an dof themselves are not a problem to me, as long as the collected funds are used well. But:
4.a. How can that relocation of funds be efficient? You'd have to tax everyone over a thousand bucks a month to get out of your costs. I say over, because like with transferring energy, you'll always 'lose' a small part of the money. In this case through the bureaucratic paychecks etc. Of those who have to relocate the funds and have to keep the paperwork in order, plus the paperwork itself. It need not be a heavy added cost, but there will always be one. That part of the cost will be higher than now because there are more recipients.
4b. I imagine they might cut back on this loss by cutting the jobs of social workers as they don't need to be there anymore to evaluate if someone met the requirements for getting the ubi instead of welfare. But social workers get people out of poverty. Which is better for the people themselves and society as a whole as it means less money needs to be redistributed. Also, social workers and help prevent dumb financial decisions and administrative hangups which cost the poorest even more. Cutting in the social sector like that is dangerous. Of course I am biased as a social worker myself.
4c. But You can't tax most people 1000 dollars extra. The ones with little and no other income, mainly. Meaning you'll need to collect more from the more well of. Again, higher taxes for richer people doesn't bother me per se. Indeed I think it is necessary even without ubi. But it becomes a pointless and waste full exercise to give them back 1000 dollars if you could just collect less from them and restrict who gets government sanctioned minimum income. Like welfare does.
4d. I imagine part of this idea is also to stop people hoarding their money in savings. I get why. You always have a minimum to fall back on so you need not prepare for the bad times just as much. But if everyone will spend more a'mnd the middle class to have a higher budget of one or two thousand dollars per household, more if they have 18+ kids, those in poverty today may well be worse off still. Because if everyone's budget rises, apart from the super rich who probably won't even feel the higher tax cut into their personal budget, costs are going to go up as well.

And I'm very interested in what the results of any test might've been. But these are problems that I don't think will surface in small scale tests, but will nonetheless arise in a nationwide application
Title: Re: The big 'ol 2020 debate
Post by: Mike Cl on January 28, 2020, 08:54:34 AM
I'll look into it, because it does interest me,. But I have initial points of doubt.
1. A minimum income through welfare is necessary. But in Belgium our social safety net is already one of the more expensive ones and let's say at least half of our clients get less than 1000 a month.
2. Those who do get more than 1000 a month really need it (example, single parents) and I don't think you'll be able to keep up ubi and welfare together. In fact I already read you'd need to pick to apply to one or another.
3. You're going to have to absorb the welfare programs to at least cover part of the cost. (and maybe even unemployment benefits or other social incomes, because that's going to be one massive cost.) So that would mean a subsection vulnareable people might get a lot less each month. (at least if it were in Belgium, I don't know welfare rates in the states)
4. Assuming they're not just printing the money extra, because that's wreck the economy, they're going to have to a this through higher taxes, because this is going to cost a lot more than the welfare program(s). Now higher taxes in an dof themselves are not a problem to me, as long as the collected funds are used well. But:
4.a. How can that relocation of funds be efficient? You'd have to tax everyone over a thousand bucks a month to get out of your costs. I say over, because like with transferring energy, you'll always 'lose' a small part of the money. In this case through the bureaucratic paychecks etc. Of those who have to relocate the funds and have to keep the paperwork in order, plus the paperwork itself. It need not be a heavy added cost, but there will always be one. That part of the cost will be higher than now because there are more recipients.
4b. I imagine they might cut back on this loss by cutting the jobs of social workers as they don't need to be there anymore to evaluate if someone met the requirements for getting the ubi instead of welfare. But social workers get people out of poverty. Which is better for the people themselves and society as a whole as it means less money needs to be redistributed. Also, social workers and help prevent dumb financial decisions and administrative hangups which cost the poorest even more. Cutting in the social sector like that is dangerous. Of course I am biased as a social worker myself.
4c. But You can't tax most people 1000 dollars extra. The ones with little and no other income, mainly. Meaning you'll need to collect more from the more well of. Again, higher taxes for richer people doesn't bother me per se. Indeed I think it is necessary even without ubi. But it becomes a pointless and waste full exercise to give them back 1000 dollars if you could just collect less from them and restrict who gets government sanctioned minimum income. Like welfare does.
4d. I imagine part of this idea is also to stop people hoarding their money in savings. I get why. You always have a minimum to fall back on so you need not prepare for the bad times just as much. But if everyone will spend more a'mnd the middle class to have a higher budget of one or two thousand dollars per household, more if they have 18+ kids, those in poverty today may well be worse off still. Because if everyone's budget rises, apart from the super rich who probably won't even feel the higher tax cut into their personal budget, costs are going to go up as well.

And I'm very interested in what the results of any test might've been. But these are problems that I don't think will surface in small scale tests, but will nonetheless arise in a nationwide application
I too, have doubts.  And I have not studied the issue much.  But just as welfare returns to the economy in general more than what we spend in welfare (I think I read that for every dollar spent on welfare, it generates 1.75 for the economy), ubi may do the same, in which case it would cost less that it first appears.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on January 28, 2020, 10:04:59 AM
I too, have doubts.  And I have not studied the issue much.  But just as welfare returns to the economy in general more than what we spend in welfare (I think I read that for every dollar spent on welfare, it generates 1.75 for the economy), ubi may do the same, in which case it would cost less that it first appears.
But regardless of whether is has a positive effect, no effect, or is widely popular (which I don't think it is), I don't see this flying.  It's far too liberal for both parties.  We can't even get universal health care, which even most Democratic contenders are no longer supporting.  UBI is in direct opposition to the tradition of identity politics.  It's a benefit for everyone, and I should support it because I saw the strategy of identity politics as a failed strategy before I ever heard of the phrase "identity politics."  But it intuitively seems like the wrong first step in leaving identity politics behind.  Honestly, I am not economically equipped to judge the economic implications of UBI.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Mike Cl on January 28, 2020, 11:06:54 AM
But regardless of whether is has a positive effect, no effect, or is widely popular (which I don't think it is), I don't see this flying.  It's far too liberal for both parties.  We can't even get universal health care, which even most Democratic contenders are no longer supporting.  UBI is in direct opposition to the tradition of identity politics.  It's a benefit for everyone, and I should support it because I saw the strategy of identity politics as a failed strategy before I ever heard of the phrase "identity politics."  But it intuitively seems like the wrong first step in leaving identity politics behind.  Honestly, I am not economically equipped to judge the economic implications of UBI.
I find this about me surprising.  As I age I am becoming more and more 'liberal' and less and less 'conservative'.  As a younger person I fully expected the process to be the opposite.  Anyway, I am like you in that I think this is too radical an idea for it to catch hold in this country.  Still, I find it an interesting concept.  I'll have to follow the experiments more closely and try to understand what the actual results are.  Right now the 1% have a strangle hold on this country and they are not about to let up any time soon.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on January 28, 2020, 12:59:52 PM
I find this about me surprising.  As I age I am becoming more and more 'liberal' and less and less 'conservative'.  As a younger person I fully expected the process to be the opposite.  Anyway, I am like you in that I think this is too radical an idea for it to catch hold in this country.  Still, I find it an interesting concept.  I'll have to follow the experiments more closely and try to understand what the actual results are.  Right now the 1% have a strangle hold on this country and they are not about to let up any time soon.

"Apologists for the programme, including the New York Times, have claimed that it is not UBI that has failed Finland, but rather the reverse—that Finland failed UBI. They claim that the pilot programme was too limited in scope to produce meaningful results and that it should have been extended to a much larger population."

The experiment in Finland, for now, is stopped.  The excuses sound like the excuses for every attempt at socialism.  Poor people in the US might be different in their behavior.  But I would expect Finns to be better behaved than Americans.  They have much more experience with socialist programs.  Americans are faithless grifters.

One problem, is if this is implemented to add to existing programs, or as a substitute.  It could just be a way to destroy Social Security and other existing programs with "bait and switch", like Obama care.  If would be a better test if it was a "value add".  I would be happy if my daughter, currently on Federal assistance, got an additional $1000 per month, but I have a conflict of interest ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on January 28, 2020, 01:06:12 PM
Initially I was supporting Tulsi Gabbard.  I don't expect her to be nominated now, but I am hoping she has BBQ Cankles for dinner ;-)

I like Buttigieg also.  CIA and FBI support him now.  I like outsiders (not DNC swamp rats).

I am not surprised at the Bernie support here.  Can't keep a good Communist down.  I wish he hadn't been fake opposition to Cankles in 2016.

The Biden crime family is a non-starter.  Warren isn't too bad, since I don't think she is serious about any of her Left policies borrowed from AOC.  She has no strong POV, other than getting elected.  Other than lying like any politician, I don't see her and her family as corrupt.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: aitm on January 28, 2020, 01:58:53 PM
I reallly don’t watch any “Debates” one, it never seems to end of being a debate. Two, whatever is said “will be done” never is, and three...it interferes with my drinking.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Mike Cl on January 28, 2020, 02:49:50 PM
I reallly don’t watch any “Debates” one, it never seems to end of being a debate. Two, whatever is said “will be done” never is, and three...it interferes with my drinking.
Odd--it has the opposite effect on me--it increases my drinking!  So, I don't watch, either.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on January 28, 2020, 02:50:49 PM
Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow Trump will still be the president.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on January 28, 2020, 02:55:21 PM
I'm just waiting to see who the Democrats' nominee will be. No sense in getting all worked up for anyone until then.

That being said, I've listened to Bernie Sanders for years on Thom Hartmann's program, every Friday, in the segment called "Brunch with Bernie." He's been consistent all this time, and I like his positions on policy. 

Also, there's this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2zS5Ug3VJg
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on January 28, 2020, 04:05:20 PM
Chris Matthews used to annoy me back in the day when I watched television.  If Chris Matthews was running for office, I sure wouldn't vote for him.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 01, 2020, 05:16:33 PM
D party stormtroopers ... aka AntiFa have rioted and destroyed public property in NYC.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHomETco0MI

Anthem of EU, UN, Corbyn and Sanders ;-)

We want violent revolution now!  White males, you have nothing to lose, but your lives in our gas chambers!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 03, 2020, 11:05:36 PM
Early Iowa Caucus Guesstimate:

Three way leader contest between … Sanders, Warren and Buttigieg ... Biden and Klobuchar getting the booby prize.

2% precincts reporting.  The new Dem smartphone app totally failed, for reporting the precinct results.  The Dems had to gather the precinct results via Amish buggy and giant tractor pull.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 04, 2020, 07:55:17 AM
Early Iowa Caucus Guesstimate:

Three way leader contest between … Sanders, Warren and Buttigieg ... Biden and Klobuchar getting the booby prize.

2% precincts reporting.  The new Dem smartphone app totally failed, for reporting the precinct results.  The Dems had to gather the precinct results via Amish buggy and giant tractor pull.

Still a total clown car.  The Dems can't even run a legitimate election in Iowa ;-(  And they dare to say a national election with Trump is illegitimate?

Just heard .... when the precincts tried to call in the results, the phone was down.  Giggle, giggle.  Hillary is busy rewriting the results, for Bloomberg.

Actual report on Bernie or Biden clown car crash ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqRP3_9weRM

When I participated full on, with politics, in 1988 Colorado caucus.  It was better than this mess.  My wife and I were delegates all the way to the Colorado state convention (but not the national convention).  Our problem was, being young prominent Dems, and with a Dem governor, we were invited with the other activists to the Governor's Mansion to meet the governor.  We were late, and didn't meet the governor, because my wife couldn't get done getting dressed on time.  All I got for all my effort was my Dukakis watch (better than a t-shirt).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 04, 2020, 11:16:25 AM
Feb 3 Iowa - still just crickets
Feb 11 New Hampshire
Feb 22 Nevada
Feb 29 South Carolina
Mar 3 14 more states

Failed app made by former Hillary supporters.  Maybe they should "learn to code"?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 04, 2020, 05:37:08 PM
Nevada Dems say, they aren't using the same app as Iowa.

Partial results released:

Buttigieg - 27% surprising (he correctly announced himself as winner yesterday)
Sanders - 25% expected

Warren - 18% expected
Biden - 16% disappointed
Klobuchar - 13% expected
=====
Total = 99%

Sanders is expected to take New Hampshire.  Biden and Warren have to make a better showing in New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina to stay funded.

In 2016, in a much closer race, Hillary and Sanders both got 49% in Iowa, with Hillary squeaking out a win after a recount.  Sanders went on to win New Hampshire by a large margin.  In 2000, McCain was defeated by 11% margin by George W in South Carolina, McCain's money dried up.  George W got labeled the "comeback kid".
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 04, 2020, 05:50:37 PM
None of this matters, since the GOP senate has released the Kraken and told Trump he can do as he likes and steal the coming election, and they'll help him do it.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 04, 2020, 05:53:41 PM
None of this matters, since the GOP senate has released the Kraken and told Trump he can do as he likes and steal the coming election, and they'll help him do it.

USA is illegitimate.  Long Live King George III!

All Republican votes are by dead people.  The Dems never do that kind of thing ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 04, 2020, 05:56:08 PM
All Republican votes are by dead people.

I guess that's why they want to take away our health care so there will be more dead people to vote for them.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 04, 2020, 05:57:05 PM
I guess that's why they want to take away our health care so there will be more dead people to vote for them.

Don't give them ideas!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 04, 2020, 06:04:07 PM
Don't give them ideas!


That's what i was told when I suggested that Trump might try to plant land mines along the southern border.

And guess what? Now he wants to legalize land mines again...
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 04, 2020, 06:41:20 PM
As CinC ... President has to defend the US against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Buttigieg was an investor in the failed app in Iowa.  It wasn't just Hillary ;-)  Politics is dirty.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 04, 2020, 06:57:55 PM
Politics is ephemeral, equations are forever.

Or, as Einstein put it: "Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity."
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 04, 2020, 09:26:09 PM
Politics is ephemeral, equations are forever.

Or, as Einstein put it: "Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity."

In defining a Platonic form.  But reality has no obligation to support any particular equation.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 05, 2020, 01:33:52 PM
Sure, if you say so, Baruch.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 05, 2020, 01:54:35 PM
The app doesn't work in Iowa? I think there's an app for that.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 05, 2020, 04:05:44 PM
Sure, if you say so, Baruch.

Marx was a ideological descendent of Plato.  So of course you support Plato's Communist Republic ... run by Guardians aka Woke professors, aka intelligentsia.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 05, 2020, 06:44:30 PM
More Americans watched the Superbowl than voted in the 2016 election.

Obviously the vast majority of Americans couldn't care less about who is president, senator, or anything else - but they really care a lot about who is the quarterback of their chosen football team.


RIP America.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Munch on February 05, 2020, 08:53:16 PM
More Americans watched the Superbowl than voted in the 2016 election.

Obviously the vast majority of Americans couldn't care less about who is president, senator, or anything else - but they really care a lot about who is the quarterback of their chosen football team.


RIP America.

haven't they always done that though?

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 05, 2020, 09:01:05 PM
I don't know, but it's one of the reasons America is going downhill like a slolem skier.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 05, 2020, 11:18:36 PM
More Americans watched the Superbowl than voted in the 2016 election.

Obviously the vast majority of Americans couldn't care less about who is president, senator, or anything else - but they really care a lot about who is the quarterback of their chosen football team.


RIP America.

Yes, the true religion of America.  When are you atheists going to protest the Super Bowl?  Most people here seem to support that sissy game, baseball ;-)

Alinsky's rules for radicals ... take America to the bottom, like a skid row drunk, so you can build him up again, with proper ideology.

BTW ... I have never been a Republican, or a Communist.  If I were voting this year, I would still not vote for Republicans as a party.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Mr.Obvious on February 06, 2020, 02:03:24 AM
More Americans watched the Superbowl than voted in the 2016 election.

Obviously the vast majority of Americans couldn't care less about who is president, senator, or anything else - but they really care a lot about who is the quarterback of their chosen football team.


RIP America.

Don't feel bad, for us voting is mandatory and we still don't have a government'
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 06, 2020, 05:56:39 AM
Don't feel bad, for us voting is mandatory and we still don't have a government'

Parliaments and proportional voting both tend toward to coalition politics.  Britain uses first-past-the-post, but still has problems with parliamentary government.  What kind of voting does Belgium have?  Proportional?

Theory, full representation of the electorate, would make about 16 different parties, not all the same size.  Because there are 16 different personality types.

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 06, 2020, 06:01:28 AM
96% results released:

Buttigieg - 26% surprising (he correctly announced himself as winner yesterday)
Sanders - 26% expected

Warren - 18% expected
Biden - 16% disappointed
Klobuchar - 12% expected
Yang - 1% disappointed
=====
Total = 99%

More on the Shadow company app.  Backed by Clinton and Obama.  Biden and Buttigieg both contributed.  Company part of another company controlled by a billionaire Israel supporter.  Did Bernie get a "quantum of solace"?  At least the company isn't called Spectre!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Mike Cl on February 06, 2020, 09:30:15 AM
Don't feel bad, for us voting is mandatory and we still don't have a government'
Your 'non' govt. is still light years ahead of our 'govt'!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 06, 2020, 11:43:41 AM
Your 'non' govt. is still light years ahead of our 'govt'!

Most anarchists would agree.  And anarchism is superior to authoritarianism.  But some anarchism is simply criminal (organized crime is the alter-government).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 06, 2020, 06:09:00 PM
The Democratic party is doing everything it can to make sure Trump gets a second term.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 06, 2020, 07:25:41 PM
The Democratic party is doing everything it can to make sure Trump gets a second term.

Strange isn't it.  CIA runs all, counts the votes, just like Stalin.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 06, 2020, 07:30:33 PM
Just more bullshit from our local bullshit artist.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 06, 2020, 08:40:25 PM
Just more bullshit from our local bullshit artist.

CIA doesn't exist then?  Vote sheeple ... bleat ... bleat.

This is the Greening of America, is will always be 1970, Earth Day, and Woodstock was just the other day.

Yeah, I feel my age too.  You have my sympathy (and many other seniors here) ... reliving one's youthful fantasies.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 06, 2020, 09:06:13 PM
Bernie is at least persistent this time.  Iowa Dem Party will recount votes.  They had to do that in 2016, due to challenge to the initial count back then.  In that case, Hillary won the recount.  Even if Bernie edges out Buttigieg in both votes and precincts ... it will be a narrow win, and Buttigieg will have still done much better than expected.  The more salient point is that Biden did less well than expected.  Bernie is expected to easily win New Hampshire.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Jason Harvestdancer on February 06, 2020, 10:23:20 PM
Already the race just got fucked up out of the gate.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Mr.Obvious on February 07, 2020, 01:00:26 AM
96% results released:

Buttigieg - 26% surprising (he correctly announced himself as winner yesterday)
Sanders - 26% expected

Warren - 18% expected
Biden - 16% disappointed
Klobuchar - 12% expected
Yang - 1% disappointed
=====
Total = 99%

More on the Shadow company app.  Backed by Clinton and Obama.  Biden and Buttigieg both contributed.  Company part of another company controlled by a billionaire Israel supporter.  Did Bernie get a "quantum of solace"?  At least the company isn't called Spectre!

Sanders should've been your man 4 years ago. Now... I don't know.

Yang getting 1%, I knew he wasn't gonna make it but damn that's harsh.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on February 07, 2020, 08:21:22 AM
I thought Biden would do better, which is odd because at first I never thought he would do that well.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 07, 2020, 10:49:25 AM
Already the race just got fucked up out of the gate.

The conspiracy theories have started.  Some say, Trump supporters called into the hot line, preventing Dem precinct captains using that back up.  Already reported on how The Shadow has many nefarious Dem connections.  Now some are blaming 4Chan.  Obviously G-d Emperor Trump is responsible, and his Sith lord Vlad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwrswvqv8sY

I actually hope that New Hampshire etc go off in a competent way.  Do we need 50 sets of conspiracy theories, plus whatever the Dem Convention does?  We really need to deport the reptilian shape shifters, starting with the Clintons.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 07, 2020, 01:41:18 PM
While the Dems are screwing up and muddling around, the GOP is consolidating their strategies and tactics to get the most bang for their big bucks. For them losing is completely out of the question, so they'll do whatever it takes to steal the election and get their idol into a second term. They can even do it openly and blatantly, since they'll have all the federal courts stacked in their favor, including the SCOTUS, so they can't lose. They'll also have every branch of law enforcement in their pockets, as well, so no one at all will be able to do anything at all to stop them.

But then, I'm a pessimist, so I could be wrong. I sincerely hope I am wrong!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 07, 2020, 01:50:13 PM
While the Dems are screwing up and muddling around, the GOP is consolidating their strategies and tactics to get the most bang for their big bucks. For them losing is completely out of the question, so they'll do whatever it takes to steal the election and get their idol into a second term. They can even do it openly and blatantly, since they'll have all the federal courts stacked in their favor, including the SCOTUS, so they can't lose. They'll also have every branch of law enforcement in their pockets, as well, so no one at all will be able to do anything at all to stop them.

But then, I'm a pessimist, so I could be wrong. I sincerely hope I am wrong!

at 03:48 you can see that Iowa Dems aren't Nazis, they are pretty typical Dems ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nAnASmciBQ

I anticipate, if the CIA wants it, just for salty Liberal tears, they will cause Trump reelection, Repub keeps the Senate and retakes the House.  That is my pessimism.  Because CIA ...
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 07, 2020, 01:53:26 PM
I hope they had their seat belts fastened, it was a very bumpy night!

LOL
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 07, 2020, 06:08:15 PM
"Barak Obama just announced that he’s getting involved to defeat Trump in 2020" ... he was so effective, with greater intervention than Nixon in 1972, in 2016 ;-)

"Blacklist Valley: How Big Tech Reshapes Politics By Censoring Conservative Ideas" ... making it harder to search Google/Youtube isn't real censorship.  Banning people from Twitter?  It would be good if all users of that shithole were banned from it.

"Trump Beats Democrats' Emoluments Lawsuit" ... if the same charge was brought against the Dem pigs + Romney in the Ukrainian pig sty ... the charges would stick.


Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Jason Harvestdancer on February 08, 2020, 01:44:53 AM
Personally, I think the Iowa caucus was the Democratic Party trying to rig the outcome and having it blow up in their faces.  Of course they're starting to blame Russia, which is what they do every time they fail at their manipulations.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 08, 2020, 12:48:02 PM
Personally, I think the Iowa caucus was the Democratic Party trying to rig the outcome and having it blow up in their faces.  Of course they're starting to blame Russia, which is what they do every time they fail at their manipulations.

"Group At Center Of Iowa Caucus App Chaos Birthed By Billionaire-Funder Of Alabama DisInfo Campaign" ... maybe.  They have experience in messing up elections.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 10, 2020, 08:40:26 AM
Feb 8 NH Poll

Sanders - 24% neck and neck with Buttigieg … ewww
Buttigieg - 22% neck and neck with Sanders … ewww
Warren - 13% like Iowa
Biden - 10% like Iowa, needs to insult more young women
Klobuchar - 9% like Iowa

"Buttigieg taught himself to speak a little bit of Norwegian and has some knowledge of Spanish, Italian, Maltese, Arabic, Dari Persian, and French in addition to his native English, though his level of fluency in those languages is unclear."

Buttigieg is a graduate of Harvard and Oxford.  So similar to Bill Clinton.  But can he play sax? ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 10, 2020, 12:32:52 PM
Lying with statistics …

79% Z Gen are lonely
71% Millennial are lonely
50% Boomers are lonely

Totally different age groups.  Depression depends strongly on sex and age.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 10, 2020, 12:34:45 PM
Weaponizing government contracts ...

"Amazon Moves To Depose Trump In Lawsuit Over $10 Billion 'JEDI' Contract" ... this is over the change of contract for giant classified cloud computing.  Amazon had this contract via CIA.  They lost it to Microsoft.  Microsoft are spawn of Satan, tool of Trump, butt buddy of Putin bwahaha.  The only question is, is the CIA happy with the change?  Of course Microsoft/Apple are tools of Red China.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Mr.Obvious on February 10, 2020, 12:35:10 PM
Lying with statistics …

79% Z Gen are lonely
71% Millennial are lonely
50% Boomers are lonely

Totally different age groups.  Depression depends strongly on sex and age.

True, the more sex I have, the less lonely I feel.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 10, 2020, 12:36:21 PM
True, the more sex I have, the less lonely I feel.

Remember to treat your woman well, she owns you!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 10, 2020, 01:32:41 PM
True, the more sex I have, the less lonely I feel.

I only feel lonely when I'm with other people.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 10, 2020, 01:36:50 PM
I only feel lonely when I'm with other people.

Hope you get over your agoraphobia.  Stay out of Greek cities!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SvZurich on February 10, 2020, 03:43:39 PM
2020 Debate? Okay, I'll bite.

Why is Scotland still a part of the UK when they want to remain in the EU? Should Scotland get another referendum regarding remaining in the UK?

Go!

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Munch on February 10, 2020, 07:31:56 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9NyAVEnBME

story not being talked about much.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 10, 2020, 07:45:11 PM
I don't understand how anyone can't see that any sort of violence is counterproductive.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Jason Harvestdancer on February 10, 2020, 08:07:14 PM
Actually I think it ties into something I've noticed before.  The left does more violence, the right is better at it.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 10, 2020, 08:53:52 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9NyAVEnBME

story not being talked about much.

Crazy Dem = All Dems ... just like Crazy Repub = All Repubs.  That is the lesson from Charlotte.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 10, 2020, 08:56:22 PM
2020 Debate? Okay, I'll bite.

Why is Scotland still a part of the UK when they want to remain in the EU? Should Scotland get another referendum regarding remaining in the UK?

Go!

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

NE Scotland was owned by Norway back in 1200.  Give it back to Norway.  All of England (not Wales) was briefly part of Denmark a few decades before the Norman Conquest in 1000+.  Just joking.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 11, 2020, 02:15:34 PM
Feb 8 NH Poll

Sanders - 24% neck and neck with Buttigieg … ewww
Buttigieg - 22% neck and neck with Sanders … ewww
Warren - 13% like Iowa
Biden - 10% like Iowa, needs to insult more young women
Klobuchar - 9% like Iowa

"Buttigieg taught himself to speak a little bit of Norwegian and has some knowledge of Spanish, Italian, Maltese, Arabic, Dari Persian, and French in addition to his native English, though his level of fluency in those languages is unclear."

Buttigieg is a graduate of Harvard and Oxford.  So similar to Bill Clinton.  But can he play sax? ;-)

34 different Dem candidates are running.  For this Dem primary, you only need to file some paperwork and a small fee, with the State.

Average of Feb 11 polls ...

Sanders - 23% as expected
Biden - 20% fading
Bloomberg - 14% got votes from Buttigieg, as conspiracy theory expected
Warren - 13% fading
Buttigieg - 10% fading
Klobuchar - 4% as expected
Total - 84% slow tightening of leaders from 3 days earlier

More fun ... New Hampshire is an open primary (Primaries open for “undeclared”/unaffiliated voters only) ... what if independents and Republicans vote in the Democrat primary?  What if they choose to mess up the Democrats by voting for Yang?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 11, 2020, 08:21:12 PM
With 12% reporting in NH ...

Sanders - 29% as expected
Buttigieg - 23% as expected
Klobuchar - 20% better than expected
Warren - 12% fading
Biden - 8% fading, left early for South Carolina
Yang - 3% as expected
Bloomberg - ? was he even on the ballot?
Total - 95% tightening compared to last poll

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SvZurich on February 11, 2020, 08:49:41 PM
And Yang just dropped out of the race today.

Bloomberg isn't even on the Nevada ballot.  He announced far too late. 

Fun fact, in Nevada we don't allow write-in candidates.  We do instead offer None of the Above as an option.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 12, 2020, 12:06:43 AM
Bloomberg isn't even on the Nevada ballot.  He announced far too late.
Have you seen his ad blitz (https://www.npr.org/2020/01/17/797048821/new-figures-show-billionaire-candidates-spending-big-with-little-return)?  I live in NC (Bloomberg opted to heavily target Super Tuesday states like mine), so I get Bloomberg ads every time I open up Candy Crush.  :(

For a guy who jumped in too late, he sure seems determined to buy his way to the top.  And the sad part is that it's kinda sorta working because that's how our system works now.  It's not necessary to do town halls or have grassroots support, maybe it's not even necessary to set foot in some the states he's presumably fighting for.  Instead, it's just straight pay to win.  If this is a strategy that actually works, it's a pretty damning indictment of our system.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 12, 2020, 12:18:41 AM
And Yang just dropped out of the race today.

Andrew Yang is the first politician I ever supported, either publically or financially. I knew he didn't have a shot at winning but I supported him because I think we need more people like Yang in government. He has humanistic values, thinks big and is solution-focused. He basically hacked the presidential electoral system to bring the issues he believes are important to national attention and clearly had fun doing it. As far as I'm concerned, he accomplished his mission. Now I need to decide who to vote for on Super Tuesday.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 12, 2020, 12:48:35 AM
I liked Yang's proposal of universal basic income.  It's a shame he couldn't continue.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Mr.Obvious on February 12, 2020, 02:26:10 AM
I liked Yang's proposal of universal basic income.  It's a shame he couldn't continue.

My doubts for such a system remain, but would have loved to see him go on ahead a little further.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 12, 2020, 07:39:25 AM
Suffice it to say I would have preferred to invest in a system that could potentially reduce poverty over what I actually funded:  dropping a record number of bombs on Afghanistan pointlessly.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 12, 2020, 08:38:49 AM
Nevada 2/22, South Carolina 2/29 and Super Tuesday on 3/3.

Bloomberg TV clip from 7 year ago, now showing he is racist.

With 87% reporting in NH ...

Sanders - 26% as expected
Buttigieg - 24% as expected
Klobuchar - 20% better than expected
Warren - 9% fading
Biden - 8% fading, left early for South Carolina
Steyer - 4% another billionaire
Gabbard - 3% as expected
Yang - 3% as expected

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 12, 2020, 12:30:53 PM
Early voting starts tomorrow so I printed out a sample ballot and researched all the candidates for the different offices. The presidential election gets all the press but the local elections often more directly affect my life. I learned some interesting things, such as one candidate was recently critically injured after being hit by a car while crossing an intersection. A judge who is running for office was censured for ordering bailiffs to handcuff a mother and place her in a holding cell while the judge lectured her children. The judge was accused of "inappropriate conduct" and "failed to remain dignified, patient and courteous."
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 12, 2020, 03:00:24 PM
Steyer has also quite the Dem race.  One Dem billionaire down, one more to go.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 13, 2020, 12:42:28 PM
"BERNIE SUPPORTER JUST TRIED TO BURN DOWN A REPUBLICAN HQ IN CALIFORNIA" ... in addition to the Dem who tried to drive down a GOP tent.

Their plan - If Bernie is robbed again, at the Milwaukee Dem Convention, then Bernie supporters are the Yippies of the 1968 Chicago Dem convention.  They will start the Red Revolution and burn Milwaukee down ... bwahaha.  Eventually they will realize that Bernie is a White Male, and kill him too.  You can't be too woke! ;-)

Yes, return to the 60s, you hippies.  We can also return to the 70s, and turn the National Guard on your Red asses ... like at Kent State and Univ of New Mexico (everyone forgets that one, happened same day as Kent State).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 13, 2020, 01:27:07 PM
The billionaires just want America to have the best government money can buy.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 13, 2020, 03:44:27 PM
The billionaires just want America to have the best government money can buy.

Which is why all plutocrats, the world over, have second homes in GB and the US.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 13, 2020, 03:46:16 PM
"Lead Juror In Roger Stone Trial Was Left-Wing Former Political Candidate Who Despises Trump" ... this is where partisan politics leads.  Eventually we have to check the party affiliation of the judge, court officers and the jurors.  Which is untenable.  At that point I would favor military courts deciding everything.

So easy for President Trump to avoid this controversy and the one with Paul Manafort.  After sentencing, pardon them, as Bill Clinton did with Mark Rich.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 14, 2020, 04:26:40 PM
"BERNIE SANDERS IS AN ECONOMICALLY ILLITERATE LIFE-LONG LOSER" ... change that to innumerate.  Most people are innumerate.  This is why fake accountants and fake accounting audit companies flourish.  This is why economists flourish.  This is why the financial side of capitalism/socialism seems reasonable.

Upton Sinclair — 'It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.'

Basically most people fall into this category ... which is why we live on confirmation bias.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 15, 2020, 10:12:48 PM
"DEMOCRAT LAUNCHES GUILLOTINE SYMBOL FOR HER US SENATE RUN, THESE PEOPLE ARE INSANE" ... all bad ideas start in France.  US had a revolution, and can carry on with rule of law and amendments to the Constitution.  If the Confederacy had bothered to amend the Constitution, so that there was a reasonable process for secession, then there would have been no need for a US Civil War.  But people don't want a Constitution, or they don't want to bother to amend it, or they simply don't want the rule of law ... because they are thugs.  Communists are thugs.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on February 16, 2020, 11:52:34 AM
And Yang just dropped out of the race today.

Bloomberg isn't even on the Nevada ballot.  He announced far too late. 

Fun fact, in Nevada we don't allow write-in candidates.  We do instead offer None of the Above as an option.
Bloomberg is deliberately blowing off the early contests and focusing on Super Tuesday.  I'd say that was a dumb decision, but politics doesn't work the way I'm used to anymore.  We'll know in early March if his tactic works.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 17, 2020, 10:27:26 AM
Politics is a two edged sword.  Sword wielders sometimes cut themselves not their opponent.

"First they laugh at you then they ignore you then they fight you then you win" - Gandhi ... this applies to all political activists.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 17, 2020, 01:01:41 PM
No such thing as a perfect candidate ...

"Bloomberg Frames Farmers As Primitive Idiots In Demeaning Diatribe" ... elite detached from reality

"Bloomberg Dubs The Queen A "Horsey-Faced Lesbian" In Outrageous Book Of Quotes' ... in modern times, nobody forgets all the stupid things you say.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on February 17, 2020, 01:18:59 PM
No such thing as a perfect candidate ...

"Bloomberg Frames Farmers As Primitive Idiots In Demeaning Diatribe" ... elite detached from reality


Particularly being the grandson of ex-share-croppers (who grew up with his grandparents), that one really rubs me the wrong way.

That can be said for a lot of things he has said, actually.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 17, 2020, 01:54:17 PM
Bloomberg is deliberately blowing off the early contests and focusing on Super Tuesday.  I'd say that was a dumb decision, but politics doesn't work the way I'm used to anymore.  We'll know in early March if his tactic works.

It seems Sanders has become the progressive leader and Bloomberg is trying to be the centrist leader. He was probably smart to let Biden, Buttigieg and Klobuchar fight it out.

I'm probably going to vote for Sanders. The way I see it (and please feel free to point out if I am wrong) is that unless younger voters show up at the polls, Trump will win. Polling indicates younger voters prefer Sanders and he seems to have the most energy behind him. I think centrists Democrats are more likely to vote for Sanders just to defeat Trump where progressives and younger voters are less likely to turn out for Biden or Bloomberg. I don't think Sander is the best person to be president, mainly because, while he is good at consolidating progressives, I don't think he can convince centrist Democrats and Republicans in Congress to pass his legislation. I don't agree with all of Sanders' policies but that's the way it goes.

My husband despises Sanders and will for Trump if he is the nominee. I might be able to convince him to vote Bloomberg if he gets the nomination.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 17, 2020, 02:53:22 PM
Particularly being the grandson of ex-share-croppers (who grew up with his grandparents), that one really rubs me the wrong way.

That can be said for a lot of things he has said, actually.

Watch the Broadway play Oklahoma?  That is full of prejudice ... Farmers bad, Cowboys good.  Of course with asphalt jungle people ... manna just drops from their stock broker straight into their mouth ;-)

I may repeat myself, my daughter, who will vote this year, has no intention of voting for anyone older than her parents (who are senior citizens already).  But there are people less than 60 still in the race (Buttigieg and Klobuchar).  It puzzles me, how anyone can consider a 60+ candidate to be part of the "youth" voting block ;-))
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 17, 2020, 03:02:12 PM
It puzzles me, how anyone can consider a 60+ candidate to be part of the "youth" voting block ;-))

Perhaps the saying is true that "everything old is new again." Sanders is pretty damn old ! 😁
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 17, 2020, 05:29:54 PM
This may seem strange, but "the youth" might be interested in more things in a candidate than how old they are or which genitals they have.

This isn't The Apprentice, folks.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 17, 2020, 11:27:42 PM
This may seem strange, but "the youth" might be interested in more things in a candidate than how old they are or which genitals they have.

This isn't The Apprentice, folks.

Good, find a centenarian to vote for ... very Chinese, very Confucian.

Millennials  are like every other youth group in the past, they are interested in drugs and women.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Jason Harvestdancer on February 18, 2020, 12:36:15 AM
Now that Yang is out, Warren is the only Asian American left in the race.

Cheap shot.

Seriously though, although he isn't in first, I am worried about Bloomberg.  Everything the Democrats say about Trump, the racism and sexism and etc, are true about Bloomberg.  When the Democrats were screeching that electing Trump made them feel like the 1930s Germany, I never imagined that they meant they would make it into 1930s Germany as a response to Trump.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 18, 2020, 12:47:33 AM
When the Democrats were screeching that electing Trump made them feel like the 1930s Germany, I never imagined that they meant they would make it into 1930s Germany as a response to Trump.
So...Trump (the concentration camp guy, the "both sides have fine people" guy, the "America First" guy, etc) as a nazi is foolishly hyperbolic, but the Dems as nazis is a perfectly valid concern?  Is Project Veritas rotting your brain?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 18, 2020, 08:54:43 AM
Now that Yang is out, Warren is the only Asian American left in the race.

Cheap shot.

Seriously though, although he isn't in first, I am worried about Bloomberg.  Everything the Democrats say about Trump, the racism and sexism and etc, are true about Bloomberg.  When the Democrats were screeching that electing Trump made them feel like the 1930s Germany, I never imagined that they meant they would make it into 1930s Germany as a response to Trump.

Nobody expected the Democrats to react ... they way they did in 1860.  Wild and crazy people, so unlike Republicans ;-)

If the Dems are going to be bought by Mini-Bloomberg, I hope he takes all his new sex slave girls and pool boys to his secret lair (queue 007 villain music).  The sharks need feeding!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuWMcl0bhu4
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Jason Harvestdancer on February 18, 2020, 09:24:30 AM
So...Trump (the concentration camp guy, the "both sides have fine people" guy, the "America First" guy, etc) as a nazi is foolishly hyperbolic, but the Dems as nazis is a perfectly valid concern?  Is Project Veritas rotting your brain?

If I was going off the Project Veritas stuff, I'd be pointing out how Bernie staffers are calling for gulags to re-educate everyone to their right.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 18, 2020, 12:24:52 PM
If I was going off the Project Veritas stuff, I'd be pointing out how Bernie staffers are calling for gulags to re-educate everyone to their right.

Correct.  If we are collectivists, then all Bernie bros are clones, like sterile female worker bees in a hive (trigger Feminism).  Same with all the Trumpsters (who are individualistic sexual-dimorphic bumble bees).  We are a tribe, we engage in tribal warfare, to the point of genocide (like so many of our ancestors, not just Nazis)?  I hope not.  Amazing how retrogressive Progressives are.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 18, 2020, 01:53:35 PM
I think we should just blow the world up and get it over with. Why go out with a whimper when there's a great bang available?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Munch on February 18, 2020, 03:53:56 PM
I think we should just blow the world up and get it over with. Why go out with a whimper when there's a great bang available?

It'll happen, we just won't be around to see it.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 18, 2020, 03:59:06 PM
Yeah, once I'm out of here the world can go to hell. Let the plutocrats have it.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 18, 2020, 04:01:20 PM
This whole charade will blow over soon, with no resignation by Barr, and no impeachment of Barr. The crooks have gotten hold of America's government, and they're not about to relinquish it.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 18, 2020, 10:08:03 PM
This whole charade will blow over soon, with no resignation by Barr, and no impeachment of Barr. The crooks have gotten hold of America's government, and they're not about to relinquish it.

Power is too important to be put into the hands of ordinary people ... they are Deplorables after all ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 18, 2020, 10:08:50 PM
I think we should just blow the world up and get it over with. Why go out with a whimper when there's a great bang available?

Sorry you are so down.  See a doctor or have a drink.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 18, 2020, 11:32:49 PM
I'm just gonna leave this here:

(https://i.imgur.com/VMt0lg2.jpg)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on February 19, 2020, 01:37:48 AM
The caucuses reward organizational ability, really -- if you can whip up your followers to actually show up at their local caucus, you get the rewards.  In a primary, all you need to do is convince your supporters to show up at their local polling station for a few minutes and tick a box.  A caucus requires a much stronger commitment.

Things are really a crapshoot right now.  If it weren't for the fact that the fate of the nation is at stake, it would be fun to watch.

Meanwhile on the Republican side, even though there are challengers to Lord Dampnut, many states are trying to cancel their Republican primaries and caucuses because how dare anyone oppose the Anointed One, and just because a candidate meets the requirements to get on a ballot doesn't mean they even print a ballot in the first place.

There's democracy in action -- or should that be inaction?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 19, 2020, 08:21:58 AM
Regarding Dems .. they still have their anti-democratic super-delegates.  So do caucus or primary matter at all?  If people will vote for a billionaire (no, I didn't vote for Trump) then should people be allowed to vote at all?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on February 19, 2020, 09:03:46 AM
It'll happen, we just won't be around to see it.
How do you know that?  These sorts of things are always surprises.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on February 19, 2020, 09:24:57 AM
It seems Sanders has become the progressive leader and Bloomberg is trying to be the centrist leader.
I think he was probably the most progressive, which would possibly say something about the voters.  Although his lead is hardly a landslide, so it may not say too much.

I think centrists Democrats are more likely to vote for Sanders just to defeat Trump where progressives and younger voters are less likely to turn out for Biden or Bloomberg.
Damn kids!  First we teach them to shut up while the adults are talking, and then we can't figure out when they don't speak up when they should.

I don't think Sanders is the best person to be president, mainly because, while he is good at consolidating progressives, I don't think he can convince centrist Democrats and Republicans in Congress to pass his legislation. I don't agree with all of Sanders' policies but that's the way it goes.
I think you are right.  Our leaders are beholding to the wealth of the country, centrist or not.  It's about money.  That said, I'm not sure what "centrist" means.  OK, it's the center, but it doesn't seem like it's the center for most people, for the leadership yes, for the people I'm in doubt.  If it does in fact reflect the actual center, It's easy to understand why Trump is president.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 19, 2020, 10:28:07 AM
"George Soros: "Remove Zuckerberg From Facebook Now... He'll Get Trump Re-elected"" ... teenage war criminal from Budapest runs everything and everyone?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 19, 2020, 10:42:19 AM
Damn kids!  First we teach them to shut up while the adults are talking, and then we can't figure out when they don't speak up when they should.

Just to be clear, I'm not talking about Millennials or Gen Z in particular. Young voters historically turn out in lower numbers. I do believe that whether Democrats win or lose hinges on the number of younger voters and polls clearly show younger voters favor Sanders. Sanders does have polarizing policies so it might be possible that more conservatives and older voters will be motivated to turn out to oppose him (Defend America From SOCIALISM!!!). It's going to be interesting.

(https://census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/visualizations/2017/comm/voting-rates-age.jpg)

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 19, 2020, 12:16:59 PM
I tell my daughter ... 173 million Americans between 20 and 60.  It is up to you working age adults to run things now!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 19, 2020, 01:21:40 PM
Sorry you are so down.  See a doctor or have a drink.

I don't do either of those any more. I'm just disgusted with politics. Maybe I should take a break from it for a while, but it's just too damned fascinating.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on February 19, 2020, 01:25:14 PM
Quote
If it does in fact reflect the actual center, It's easy to understand why Trump is president.

I've pretty consistently said the "American left" is at best central, and the "American right" is pretty far right, and I still hold to that... and I do think that applies to the voters just as much as the politicians, at least on what is considered "left".

We are an incredibly conservative country, particularly once you get away from the coasts.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 19, 2020, 01:28:11 PM
But surely God is in control, right? Surely God wouldn't let the world go to hell due to such a simple thing as a virus, would he?

I wonder how many people really believe that crap. I bet no one really does. But they'll pray all day and twice on Sundays anyway.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 19, 2020, 02:09:02 PM
I think you are right.  Our leaders are beholding to the wealth of the country, centrist or not.  It's about money.  That said, I'm not sure what "centrist" means.  OK, it's the center, but it doesn't seem like it's the center for most people, for the leadership yes, for the people I'm in doubt.  If it does in fact reflect the actual center, It's easy to understand why Trump is president.


Perhaps I should have said moderates. I was referring to is how politicians identify and vote. According to Gallup in 2019, this is how Americans identify themselves.

(https://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/obqljgm5gk-rhmhgpmck-w.png)

My concern is whether Sanders can convince members of Congress who identify as moderate or conservative to support his legislation, particularly Medicare For All, which is the issue I care most about.

I've pretty consistently said the "American left" is at best central, and the "American right" is pretty far right, and I still hold to that... and I do think that applies to the voters just as much as the politicians, at least on what is considered "left".

We are an incredibly conservative country, particularly once you get away from the coasts.

I agree that Americans are very conservative when you leave the major metropolitan areas. I don't know where America falls in a list of the other countries in the world regarding liberal and conservative governments and cultural values.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on February 19, 2020, 02:52:08 PM
With moderates and conservatives holding 70% of the vote, it's likely that a huge number of democratic politicians will not represent liberal values. So no news there.  We already know that, and the Trump phenomenon is not really an aberration. Sanders at 26% is in line with 26% of the voters identifying as liberal.  The rest of the contenders are splitting the rest of the vote, but I already see a flaw in my reasoning, because your chart shows America's views, not Democrat's views.  I think that might yield different results.

Yet four years ago, a hypothetical poll showed Sanders winning against Trump, but 4 years ago was a bad year for pollsters as we all know.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 19, 2020, 06:17:23 PM
It is delusional to label voters as "anything" .. we don't have anything in common.  Usually I have been liberal on domestic policy and conservative on foreign policy.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 19, 2020, 06:18:25 PM
I've pretty consistently said the "American left" is at best central, and the "American right" is pretty far right, and I still hold to that... and I do think that applies to the voters just as much as the politicians, at least on what is considered "left".

We are an incredibly conservative country, particularly once you get away from the coasts.

That is why tsunamis are good things ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 19, 2020, 07:50:43 PM
"WaPo Claims Elites Should Run Elections; Quietly Edits Article After Public Outrage Ensues" .. the truth is getting harder to hide.  Support your local billionaire, including the one at WaPo.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on February 20, 2020, 07:25:22 AM
Bloomberg: "Yes, I should exist. I worked hard for my money."

Fuck. Off.

Not a single billionaire "worked hard" to be where they are, they cheated the system, they cheated their employees and they cheated their fellow citizens.

I despise when billionaires use that phrase with a passion.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on February 20, 2020, 08:15:42 AM
It's questionable whether anyone that makes $5,000/hr works that hard. I'm sure they are clever enough, but I'm not sure that has much to do with being presidential.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 20, 2020, 08:54:14 AM
(https://i.redd.it/avngnunszwh41.png)

It's literally impossible to get that wealthy by normal means.  You have to do some serious wealth redistribution against the lower classes to "earn" the sort of lifestyle where you can buy the Presidency on a whim.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 20, 2020, 10:06:17 AM
Bloomberg: "Yes, I should exist. I worked hard for my money."

Fuck. Off.

Not a single billionaire "worked hard" to be where they are, they cheated the system, they cheated their employees and they cheated their fellow citizens.

I despise when billionaires use that phrase with a passion.

Bloomberg et al, got bailout in 2008/2009 from Bush/Obama.  And Bloomberg et al have profited a lot from the always expanding China trade.

Some businessmen are workaholics.  But is that work?

Top tax rate before Saint JFK?

"The top marginal tax rate in 1960 was 91%, which applied to income over $200,000 (for single filers) or $400,000 (for married filers) – thresholds which correspond to approximately $1.5 million and $3 million, respectively, in today's dollars. Approximately 0.00235% of households had income taxed at the top rate."

Son of head of Irish-America Mafia changed that.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: PopeyesPappy on February 20, 2020, 11:22:24 AM
It's literally impossible to get that wealthy by normal means.  You have to do some serious wealth redistribution against the lower classes to "earn" the sort of lifestyle where you can buy the Presidency on a whim.

This seems to be a serious misunderstanding of how the richest of the rich accumulate their wealth. Bezos, Gates, Buffett, Zuckerberg, and yes even Bloomberg didn’t get where they are by paying themselves billions in salaries. They got there by starting businesses and growing them.

Their wealth isn’t the result of redistribution. It is the result of creating wealth from thin air. The companies were worth nothing when they were started. Now they are worth trillions. These people don’t have billions of dollars sitting in vaults either. Most of their wealth only exists on stock exchange balance sheets.

As far as this year’s democrat presidential candidates go, I think Biden and possibly Bloomberg are probably the only ones with a chance at beating Trump. I don’t believe most of the rest of the front runners can pull in enough of the moderate vote to do the job. If you look at GSOgymrat’s chart above and do the math you will see that the democratic nominee will need to get more than 62% of the moderate vote to win the popular electrician. I don’t see most of this year’s front runners being able to do that.

As far as personal choice goes, I don’t like any of them. I’ll probably vote for any of them over Trump except for Bloomberg. I’ll either vote Green Party or just leave my presidential ballot blank if he ends up with the nomination.

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 20, 2020, 12:07:00 PM
Well, that was a lively debate. I didn't understand Bloomberg's appeal before and I still don't understand it. He did make one point that I think doesn't get expressed enough-- the reason we have billionaires in America is because Congress and the American people allowed it. The 99% could have controlled the 1%. Americans allowed their representatives to approve tax codes, bailouts, and subsidies and didn't hold them accountable. I believe in capitalism and I believe the purpose of government is to represent the public good and put limits on corporations just as we put limits on the actions of individuals. Unfortunately, we are in a political situation similar to the climate situation where we have been complacent to the point that turning the ship around is extremely difficult, especially when there is a sizable percentage of Americans who don't believe we are on the wrong course.



Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 20, 2020, 12:14:58 PM
Their wealth isn’t the result of redistribution. It is the result of creating wealth from thin air.
Early april fools joke?

When companies receive corporate welfare from the government (or subsidies, or wars on their behalf), who do you think foots the bill?

And don't you think that massively raising prices on products/services that are basically indispensible to the middle class - college, healthcare, housing - and funneling that mostly to a few very rich individuals consitutes wealth redistrubution? 

Hell, Trump seems to using his position as President to pursue an awful lot of business deals abroad and to conduct government business at places he owns.  Who pays for that?  Does that money just appear out of thin air?


Quote
The companies were worth nothing when they were started. Now they are worth trillions.
And who do you think ultimately generates those profits, day in and day out?  Does Bezos personally ship those packages?  I mean, ffs, an employee literally died in one of those warehouses and they didn't even shut it down for the day, they were told to just keep going as if nothing happened.

It takes an awfully myopic mindest to not notice the brutal reality of how these vast fortunes are made.  Some do it comparitively ethically, but I gotta tell ya, it's not all sunshine and gumdrops, and no one waves a magic wand and creates wealth out of thin air
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 20, 2020, 12:53:57 PM
Well, that was a lively debate.
https://youtu.be/QD4csGWPo6o

Tell me about it.  Bloomberg got rocked so hard by Warren and others that I don't see how any self-respecting democrat could possibly vote for him now.

Quote
I didn't understand Bloomberg's appeal before and I still don't understand it.
I do.  Spending hundreds of milllions of dollars on ads buys you a lot of friends.

And if you're one of those low-information voters that these ads prey upon, you probably don't even know why people are going after the guy.  All you know is that he says he doesn't like [bad thing] and will "get it done" and that seems appealing enough.

Plus, Bloomberg coverage is pretty positive at Bloomberg.com.  Strange how that works out.

Quote
He did make one point that I think doesn't get expressed enough-- the reason we have billionaires in America is because Congress and the American people allowed it. The 99% could have controlled the 1%. Americans allowed their representatives to approve tax codes, bailouts, and subsidies and didn't hold them accountable.
Exactly.  Now, more than ever, we desperately need a candidate that will address this.  Specifically, someone who will work to combat Citizens United.  Unless we work together to claw back our democracy, we will never have to worry about elections again.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 20, 2020, 01:12:42 PM
Quote from: Hydra009
Specifically, someone who will work to combat Citizens United.  Unless we work together to claw back our democracy, we will never have to worry about elections again.

Agreed. As I said before, like climate change I don't think the average American understands how far we have gone down this road. If we have four more years of Trump and the Republican's (Trump is the symptom of a greater problem) pro-corporate policies and judicial appointments it will be decades, if ever, to have a government that protects the public good and the middle and lower classes.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 20, 2020, 01:35:20 PM
Hopefully, this time we finally get it right.

Because if not - if it's another 4 years of Trump or some carbon copy of Trump - we are completely and utterly fucked.  If the political will isn't there to resist corruption right now, after 3 very dark years, then all bets are off in the future.  These corrupt pieces of human garbage will be dug in like ticks, they will stack the courts, they will ensure Russian-style elections, and they will never ever give up their power.  The end.

Unless...
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 20, 2020, 01:36:41 PM
We got here by tiny increments, most of which went completely unnoticed by the vast majority of Americans. The water's been heating more and more, until it's near to boiling, and most people still don't notice it.

We're not going to get our democracy back by the same method of using tiny increments. We have to get it, and we have to do it now, or it will be gone forever. We can't afford to pussy-foot around about it, thinking we can just complain enough and the rich will give back the power they've gotten. We need bold actions, like FDR was forced into during the depression, that saved capitalism from it's own excesses.

I don't know how we get there, but the longer we let things continue trending the way they have the more draconian the measures will be that we'll be forced into making.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on February 20, 2020, 02:00:03 PM
Quote
Their wealth isn’t the result of redistribution. It is the result of creating wealth from thin air.

But what is that "thin air"?

It's cutting corners and exploiting loopholes. It's using slave labour in third world countries. It's stiffing competition and creating a virtual monopoly with at most 2-3 major players offering a service (and often times only one offering that service in each region that the major players divided up amongst themselves). It's using predatory practices and unethical influencing of consumers, particularly when you are talking about banks and all their loans which can reach mafia levels of interest and intimidation to pay it. It's buying politicians to make sure you don't have to pay your share of taxes.

Thin air is that and so, so much more. It's not just magical money that appears from nowhere and costs no one anything.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 20, 2020, 04:49:08 PM
Bloomberg to hire shills (https://www.newsweek.com/michael-bloomberg-2020-election-pays-social-media-users-advertising-text-social-media-1488213)

At this point, you're obliged to ask anyone supporting Bloomberg if they're being paid to do so.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 20, 2020, 04:49:44 PM
I wonder if Bloomberg has "binders full of women"?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 20, 2020, 04:52:14 PM
I wonder if Bloomberg has "binders full of women"?
No, but he has binders full of women under NDA.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 20, 2020, 04:58:39 PM
Bloomberg to hire shills (https://www.newsweek.com/michael-bloomberg-2020-election-pays-social-media-users-advertising-text-social-media-1488213)

At this point, you're obliged to ask anyone supporting Bloomberg if they're being paid to do so.

Mchael Bloomberg's presidential campaign will reportedly pay hundreds of people $2,500 a month to promote the candidate via text message and their personal social media feeds. ..

Perhaps this explains the text I received yesterday from a local area code:

"Hey Ford! This is Clara with Team Bloomberg for North Carolina. We have a huge weekend of action coming up in your neighborhood. Does volunteering on Saturday or Sunday work better for you?"
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 20, 2020, 05:01:46 PM
When democracy can be bought there is no more democracy.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 20, 2020, 05:33:29 PM
Hopefully, this time we finally get it right.

Because if not - if it's another 4 years of Trump or some carbon copy of Trump - we are completely and utterly fucked.  If the political will isn't there to resist corruption right now, after 3 very dark years, then all bets are off in the future.  These corrupt pieces of human garbage will be dug in like ticks, they will stack the courts, they will ensure Russian-style elections, and they will never ever give up their power.  The end.

Unless...

Any human, would f*ck their own sister and kill their own brother .. the only question is price.  All nations come to an end, even the much beloved Soviet Union.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 20, 2020, 05:39:27 PM
This seems to be a serious misunderstanding of how the richest of the rich accumulate their wealth. Bezos, Gates, Buffett, Zuckerberg, and yes even Bloomberg didn’t get where they are by paying themselves billions in salaries. They got there by starting businesses and growing them.

Their wealth isn’t the result of redistribution. It is the result of creating wealth from thin air. The companies were worth nothing when they were started. Now they are worth trillions. These people don’t have billions of dollars sitting in vaults either. Most of their wealth only exists on stock exchange balance sheets.

As far as this year’s democrat presidential candidates go, I think Biden and possibly Bloomberg are probably the only ones with a chance at beating Trump. I don’t believe most of the rest of the front runners can pull in enough of the moderate vote to do the job. If you look at GSOgymrat’s chart above and do the math you will see that the democratic nominee will need to get more than 62% of the moderate vote to win the popular electrician. I don’t see most of this year’s front runners being able to do that.

As far as personal choice goes, I don’t like any of them. I’ll probably vote for any of them over Trump except for Bloomberg. I’ll either vote Green Party or just leave my presidential ballot blank if he ends up with the nomination.

Peasants don't understand stock options, because we don't get them!  Frivolous wealth is created in the financial markets, and saved/inflated by the Federal Reserve.  Of course it helps when the government applies their thumb to the balance scales in favor of those already favored (crony capitalism).  But unless you get entry to that level of society (by effort or inheritance) ... you have no leverage.  Society has leverage, because a group of men can do many times what one man can do (hive mind), exponentially.  Of course such a "wishing tree" is abused by those who have access.  Because corruption is the middle name of anyone who is tempted by gain, which is anyone with access to it.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 20, 2020, 05:43:44 PM
When democracy can be bought there is no more democracy.

Augustus became Emperor, because he owned all the gold and silver coin in Roman lands.  The Senate only had authority over bronze coin.  And that was by allowance from the Emperor.  With every coin having the portrait of the Emperor ... and him being the Pontifex Maximus (pagan Pope), the coins were definitely Caesars (per NT).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 20, 2020, 05:54:42 PM
Perhaps this explains the text I received yesterday from a local area code:

"Hey Ford! This is Clara with Team Bloomberg for North Carolina. We have a huge weekend of action coming up in your neighborhood. Does volunteering on Saturday or Sunday work better for you?"
Strangely enough, I got my first two today.  One from a Warren volunteer asking for someone I don't know.  Possibly a wrong number, though I heard that replying back is how they get ya.  Another from a Washington DC area code, dunno who.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 20, 2020, 05:58:44 PM
I will now treat political poll calls or political survey calls like flaming sacks of shit on my porch.  Just gonna let the US burn down.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 20, 2020, 08:25:31 PM
Are the Republicon and Democratic parties really the same?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcF5o-qkphg
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Jason Harvestdancer on February 20, 2020, 09:20:19 PM
But what is that "thin air"?

It's cutting corners and exploiting loopholes. It's using slave labour in third world countries. It's stiffing competition and creating a virtual monopoly with at most 2-3 major players offering a service (and often times only one offering that service in each region that the major players divided up amongst themselves). It's using predatory practices and unethical influencing of consumers, particularly when you are talking about banks and all their loans which can reach mafia levels of interest and intimidation to pay it. It's buying politicians to make sure you don't have to pay your share of taxes.

Thin air is that and so, so much more. It's not just magical money that appears from nowhere and costs no one anything.

Wealth is not created out of thin air, but currency is in our current age.  The problem with magical money is that it devalues existing money.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on February 20, 2020, 09:45:22 PM
Wealth is not created out of thin air, but currency is in our current age.  The problem with magical money is that it devalues existing money.

True. I should have worded it as wealth rather than money, since I was talking about something tangible (an individual's power to buy things) rather than the currency itself.

Fiat money definitely has it's problems (as you said, it devalues "traditional" currencies), but at the same time it has a lot of practicalities that commodity-backed currency doesn't. I don't think modern society could run on a commodity economy.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 20, 2020, 10:50:45 PM
True. I should have worded it as wealth rather than money, since I was talking about something tangible (an individual's power to buy things) rather than the currency itself.

Fiat money definitely has it's problems (as you said, it devalues "traditional" currencies), but at the same time it has a lot of practicalities that commodity-backed currency doesn't. I don't think modern society could run on a commodity economy.

That is a first class question.  To the head of the class you go!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 20, 2020, 11:10:43 PM
Wealth is not created out of thin air, but currency is in our current age.  The problem with magical money is that it devalues existing money.

It is more complicated now than in the British Empire, and it was complicated then.  The Brits are resource poor, they had to create the Bank of England, sleep with the Rothschilds, defeat the kings of France and Napoleon ... to effectively go on a gold standard.  And that was the base on which a silver pound was built, but you still needed to get the silver..  To get enough silver for change (bills of exchange take care of large transfers, and still did in the mid 20th century) Britain had to develop tea in Sri Lanka, to avoid sending all their silver to China (to pay for all the tea they imported), and get the Chinese addicted to opium, and create Hong Kong to protect their drug pushing, and defeat the Chinese twice (Opium Wars) .... to suck all the silver out of China, that got a lot of it originally because of the Spanish/Portuguese earlier sending much of the silver of Mexico and Bolivia to Manila, for their earlier China trade, in silk and porcelain.

Money is magical, making war possible, but commodity money is self limiting in a way that paper currency, and now digital currency of many types (see CDS, Derivatives and bundled mortgages which are monetized commercial insurance policies) is not.  Nobody has been on a pure gold standard, but some have had enough gold to form a monetary base, on which silver and bronze can float.  Lydian Empire, Persian Empire, Macedonian Empire, Ptolomaic Kingdom, Roman Empire.  Athens was an example of a money that had silver as its base, not gold.  The net effect of too tight money supply, is deflation, which is worse for some parts of society than inflation.  The point of having a strong money, gold or silver, was not only to regulate prices indirectly, but to have an authority comparable to the present BIS (bank for international settlements).  WW I and WW II killed commodity money, the world was too big, the population too great, the daily money flow to quick and vast.  But if we had stuck to a pure gold-based standard, both the German Empire and the British Empire would have not been able to even start WW I.  The day war was declared in 1914, both the British and German empires dropped out of the gold standard.  Thucydides shows the financial basis of war, in Athens, in his history.  And Cicero says that war requires a literal ocean of money.  This is Sparta?  They had no money, just superb men, but there were never enough of them in the long term.

Over 14 trillion dollars was injected into the world economy, but the US, since 2008 ... but no inflation.  This is because it is just an accounting entry that can't be actually spent.  If it gets spent, we will have Weimar.  From 1971, the US and the world that depends in the US, uses the Petro-Dollar.  That is why the US has to kill every Arab and Persian, for their own good.  And there is still a gold basis at Ft Knox (but this is  pyramid that is upside down, very more unstable than in 1945).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 20, 2020, 11:11:31 PM
Are the Republicon and Democratic parties really the same?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcF5o-qkphg

The problem is they are both American.  Get rid of America, problem solved.  Of course that just creates new problems ;-)

We are still the same shit hole as 50 years ago, but we have rhetorically redefined and multiplied the definition of white-black ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STQNi7ArRl8
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 21, 2020, 06:01:55 PM
Bloomberg is letting the NDA ladies out of their agreements.  If there is just one sufficiently angry woman among them .. pow, right in Bloomberg's face!

"ICE ignores California law in courthouse arrests, prompting outcry from local officials" ... the Feds can't make the local law enforcement do the Feds job (Federal separation of powers), but it is legal if a person has been convicted of a misdemeanor or crime, who is not a legal citizen (most are overstayed visa holders in fact) then it is legit for the Feds to arrest the miscreants on the premises.

I hope some of the irate local officials try to use force to protect these Dem voters ;-) ... so local officials can be sent to Federal prison for ... violence.  As an example to the others.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 21, 2020, 06:10:53 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwUL2AN-zQs

Pigeons United To Interfere Now

What a concept!

Well, I guess flying rats are better than flying monkeys.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 21, 2020, 08:44:17 PM
So you are the Wicked Witch of the West?

Russian pigeons?  Can you see little Order of Lenin medals on their hats?

I expect Dems to realize that they share the same air with Russia ... and die from holding their breath!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 22, 2020, 06:30:08 AM
Bloomberg fears that Sanders lead could become "insurmountable", suggests that some of his rivals drop out of the race (https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/483944-rivals-worry-sanders-building-insurmountable-super-tuesday-lead)

Unsurmountable, eh?  I remember that it wasn't long ago that the talking heads were saying that Sanders didn't have a chance, that he's stubborn and foolish and that an old person (how old is Trump?  how old is Bloomberg?) like him didn't have the vigor to campaign anymore.

Quote
Both Buttigieg and Bloomberg are pressuring the other moderate candidates, including former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), to drop out so that the anti-Sanders crowd can coalesce around one alternative.

Bloomberg is doing worse in the polls than Biden at the moment, so the logic behind this seems questionable at best.  Definitely a lot of myside bias going on.

Regardless, I think this is going to play out a lot like the Republican primary where Trump was gaining steam and the "moderates" (or whatever passes for moderate among republicans) were too proud and too self-centered to give up their shot for the greater good.  As a result, they split the vote and Trump won.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 22, 2020, 02:58:00 PM
Bloomberg fears that Sanders lead could become "insurmountable", suggests that some of his rivals drop out of the race (https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/483944-rivals-worry-sanders-building-insurmountable-super-tuesday-lead)

Unsurmountable, eh?  I remember that it wasn't long ago that the talking heads were saying that Sanders didn't have a chance, that he's stubborn and foolish and that an old person (how old is Trump?  how old is Bloomberg?) like him didn't have the vigor to campaign anymore.

Bloomberg is doing worse in the polls than Biden at the moment, so the logic behind this seems questionable at best.  Definitely a lot of myside bias going on.

Regardless, I think this is going to play out a lot like the Republican primary where Trump was gaining steam and the "moderates" (or whatever passes for moderate among republicans) were too proud and too self-centered to give up their shot for the greater good.  As a result, they split the vote and Trump won.

Sounds like a call for NYC to make offers that can't be refused, or maybe Hillary needs to unleash the Arkancide team?

Yes, in 2016, the Republican field was a septic tank of incompetence.  JEB seemed cut from the same dead tree as Shrub.  Hillary almost got around that ... with fake Bernie opposition, but no real opposition.  At the time, wasn't it called a coronation?  Black swan event .. there are no black swans, until you see one.  Trump is a random event.  Mike Pence is more typical Republican.

One conspiracy theory is Bloomberg spends a mint, doesn't get the nomination, but dries up the other candidates enough so that there is a hung convention, and the super-delegates can bring on Hillary again ;-(  Another theory has it, that Bloomberg is really targeted against Buttigieg, not Sanders.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 22, 2020, 05:55:20 PM
"Are US Intel 'Officials' Meddling In US Election With "Report" Russia Is Aiding Sanders?" ... of course, just like when they claimed that candidate Trump was a Russia agent. 

These spooks have been interfering ever since the assassination of JFK ... and probably long before that.  Were the Pinkertons paid off by the Rothschilds to leave President Lincoln unprotected at Ford's Theater?  The Pinkertons, a private detective/security company, was the predecessor to both the Secret Service and the FBI.  There were as many Pinkertons in the 1890s as there are FBI staff today.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 22, 2020, 08:18:25 PM
Sanders is the projected winner in Nevada and is predicted to have the popular vote in all three states so far (Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 22, 2020, 10:27:44 PM
Sanders is the projected winner in Nevada and is predicted to have the popular vote in all three states so far (Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada)

Correct.  A little early to call Nevada.  They are a caucus state.  They had a Google app, instead of Shadow.  They have dropped that app just in case.  Google is run by the CIA, not Hillary, so it might be better, they just aren't sure.  They will hand count the balance ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 22, 2020, 11:06:49 PM
Nevada Caucus 23% reporting

Sanders - 47% - as expected
Biden - 23% - as expected
Buttigieg - 14% - as expected
Warren - 9% - disappointing
Steyer - 4% - withdrawn
Klobuchar - 3% -disappointing
Total - 99%

Currently Biden is leading in S Carolina.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 23, 2020, 02:24:03 AM
Currently Biden is leading in S Carolina.
True, but it's a slim lead and dropping. (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-primary-d/south-carolina/)

Nationally, Biden has dropped like a stone in the past month or so (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html), from the high 20s to high 10s.  It's not impossible that he can make a comeback, but it's not particularly likely.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 23, 2020, 02:46:11 AM
Meanwhile, bots for Bloomberg (https://www.latimes.com/business/technology/story/2020-02-21/twitter-suspends-bloomberg-accounts)

As inauthentic in delivery as in conception.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 23, 2020, 08:26:58 AM
Nevada Caucus 50% reporting

Sanders - 47% - as expected
Biden - 19% - as expected
Buttigieg - 15% - as expected
Warren - 10% - disappointing
Steyer - 4% - withdrawn
Klobuchar - 5% - Go Amy!  Beat a guy who has withdrawn!
Total - 99%
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 23, 2020, 09:12:32 AM
Russians under the bed dementia ...

Voted for Obama twice, and he sold 20% of US uranium to the Russians ...

Я читаю Правду на Потомаке каждый день.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 24, 2020, 12:49:26 AM
"Intelligence Sources? All Candidates Are Russian Agents But Pete Buttigieg" ... Satire, but really, Pete sold his soul to the CIA/FBI last year.

Bernie said today, he more or less supports Fidel Castro's revolution.  So did Lee Harvey Oswald.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 24, 2020, 01:22:07 AM
I may have spoken too soon with South Carolina.  Biden seems to have gained a bit since my last post.  According to 538 (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primary-forecast/south-carolina/), he has a 49% chance of winning the most votes, while Sanders has a 42% chance.  Likely either a Biden victory or an Iowa-esqe nail-biter.  Either way, congrats on having the worst Carolina.

On the other hand, North Carolina (home of yours truly), favors Sanders.  Sanders has a 53% chance of winning the most votes, while Biden has a 23% chance.  Bloomberg is worrisome here with a 20% chance, uncomfortably close for someone who wasn't in this race until recently.  I can barely turn on my phone without getting a Bloomberg ad and RIP my inbox.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 24, 2020, 07:36:20 AM
I may have spoken too soon with South Carolina.  Biden seems to have gained a bit since my last post.  According to 538 (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primary-forecast/south-carolina/), he has a 49% chance of winning the most votes, while Sanders has a 42% chance.  Likely either a Biden victory or an Iowa-esqe nail-biter.  Either way, congrats on having the worst Carolina.

On the other hand, North Carolina (home of yours truly), favors Sanders.  Sanders has a 53% chance of winning the most votes, while Biden has a 23% chance.  Bloomberg is worrisome here with a 20% chance, uncomfortably close for someone who wasn't in this race until recently.  I can barely turn on my phone without getting a Bloomberg ad and RIP my inbox.

Biden may gain some votes because Black/Hispanic vote is running strongly against Buttigieg/Warren/Klobuchar.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 24, 2020, 11:27:27 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSsRQ4UB1RY


(https://i.imgflip.com/1ebayb.gif)




Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 24, 2020, 12:30:02 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k06vMRJli7w&list=PLZ8c54cxQG2HOBMD-2uiKKOV4qagowMdM

Entrance fee to Debate was $470 million, not $300 million!  Don't discount The Mike!

In half of the parallel universes, Hillary is President right now, but Bernie sucks in all of them ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 24, 2020, 12:31:13 PM
(https://i.redd.it/53yp2j7vhwi41.jpg)

I'd rather have the bat soup and wash it down with centipede-flavored Le Croix.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 24, 2020, 01:25:37 PM
Bernie said today, he more or less supports Fidel Castro's revolution.  So did Lee Harvey Oswald.

So did I - I just didn't support Castro.


Of course, at the time, I knew nothing about it.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 24, 2020, 01:34:28 PM
I guess I'd rather have Gloomberg than for Trump to have another term - but it's a really close call.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 24, 2020, 03:08:26 PM
So did I - I just didn't support Castro.


Of course, at the time, I knew nothing about it.

Don't like beards or don't like cigars or don't like Jewish Mafia (which used to run Cuba)?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 24, 2020, 03:09:01 PM
I guess I'd rather have Gloomberg than for Trump to have another term - but it's a really close call.

Political fence sitting gets you splinters ;-(
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 24, 2020, 09:57:20 PM
You know you want her to run a third time ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjZ6Wg3CUqg&list=PLZ8c54cxQG2Er3jT_VcduPQWzeNMvvrzl&index=3
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 24, 2020, 11:26:34 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/rHrQuj2.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/96sY9mQ.jpg)

Oh, they deserve better alright.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 24, 2020, 11:54:20 PM
I think the Republicans are underestimating Sanders. It will be ironic if Sanders wins and these Southern conservatives inadvertently helped put a Yankee Jewish "socialist" into office.

'Operation Chaos': Republican voters aim to skew SC Democratic primary

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/operation-chaos-republican-voters-aim-to-skew-sc-democratic-primary/ar-BBZFIk7?ocid=spartanntp

At least two Republican groups in the Upstate are organizing efforts to skew South Carolina's Democratic presidential primary to make a point and help reelect President Donald Trump. They are urging loyal Republicans to vote in the Democratic primary on Feb. 29 for candidates perceived to be weak in opposition to Trump — for U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont in one case and for "the worst Democrat" in another, dubbed "Operation Chaos." Since South Carolina has open primaries where voters do not have to register by political party, voters can cast ballots in either primary. ...

A separate effort has been organized by Conservative Defense Fund, a political group out of Simpsonville run by former Republican state House candidate Christopher Sullivan. Sullivan's effort has not advocated for a specific spoiler candidate but has produced fliers titled "Operation Chaos" which were distributed at a party meeting Monday. The flier urged Republicans to "vote for the 'worst' Democrat." Sullivan said Wednesday he wants closed primaries, which he expects would lead to more solidly pro-life officials elected in the state. He said he has not organized with any party officials but had a positive reaction from party leaders at the Greenville County Republican Party executive committee meeting. ...


(https://images.dailykos.com/images/763508/story_image/Opchaos.jpg?1580927323)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on February 25, 2020, 01:34:08 AM
I think the Republicans are underestimating Sanders. It will be ironic if Sanders wins and these Southern conservatives inadvertently helped put a Yankee Jewish "socialist" into office.

'Operation Chaos': Republican voters aim to skew SC Democratic primary

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/operation-chaos-republican-voters-aim-to-skew-sc-democratic-primary/ar-BBZFIk7?ocid=spartanntp

At least two Republican groups in the Upstate are organizing efforts to skew South Carolina's Democratic presidential primary to make a point and help reelect President Donald Trump. They are urging loyal Republicans to vote in the Democratic primary on Feb. 29 for candidates perceived to be weak in opposition to Trump — for U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont in one case and for "the worst Democrat" in another, dubbed "Operation Chaos." Since South Carolina has open primaries where voters do not have to register by political party, voters can cast ballots in either primary. ...

A separate effort has been organized by Conservative Defense Fund, a political group out of Simpsonville run by former Republican state House candidate Christopher Sullivan. Sullivan's effort has not advocated for a specific spoiler candidate but has produced fliers titled "Operation Chaos" which were distributed at a party meeting Monday. The flier urged Republicans to "vote for the 'worst' Democrat." Sullivan said Wednesday he wants closed primaries, which he expects would lead to more solidly pro-life officials elected in the state. He said he has not organized with any party officials but had a positive reaction from party leaders at the Greenville County Republican Party executive committee meeting. ...


(https://images.dailykos.com/images/763508/story_image/Opchaos.jpg?1580927323)

Don't even have to bother hiding the fact they are trying to cheat the election system anymore, because they know no one is going to stop them. It's such a broken, corrupt system and it's only going to get worse at this rate.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 25, 2020, 10:23:35 AM
Voting is cheating in an election ;-))
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 25, 2020, 01:42:02 PM
You know you want her to run a third time ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjZ6Wg3CUqg&list=PLZ8c54cxQG2Er3jT_VcduPQWzeNMvvrzl&index=3


Hell, I didn't want her to run the first couple of times.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 25, 2020, 05:08:44 PM
Guess her pantsuits don't impress you ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 26, 2020, 08:39:36 AM
South Carolina debate ... bwahaha.  Poor Biden, not even sure why he is standing there.  Bloomberg admitting that he spent $100 million buying votes in 2018 to get Dems control of the House.  Sanders admitting he never met a communist he didn't like.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 26, 2020, 11:27:55 AM
South Carolina debate ... bwahaha.  Poor Biden, not even sure why he is standing there.  Bloomberg admitting that he spent $100 million buying votes in 2018 to get Dems control of the House.  Sanders admitting he never met a communist he didn't like.

At times it just turned into a free-for-all. For me, the debate was discouraging because it highlighted just how split the Democratic party is. I have no idea how this is going to turn out but I worry that progressive Democrats won't turn out for a non-progressive candidate and vice versa.

My number one issue is healthcare. In an ideal world, Sander's plan would be the best because by taking the profit out of healthcare, money is saved and healthcare outcomes become the metric for success. The problem is the Sanders' plan has almost no chance of being approved by non-progressive Democrats and Republicans in Congress. To go from a profit-driven healthcare system straight to a profitless healthcare system with our current government is completely unrealistic. That means if I really want universal coverage I should support one of the candidates who will be able to work with non-progressive Democrats and Republicans to pass something that would hopefully look like the Swiss healthcare system.

If Buttigieg wasn't gay he would be my choice but I think the bias against LGBTQ people is too prevalent for him to win a general election. I feel like Biden is a step backward. I won't vote for Bloomberg on principle. Klobuchar and Steyer have no chance at this point. I don't think Warren is as good a politician as Sanders (and her rhetorical devices annoy me). That leads me back to Sanders.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: aitm on February 26, 2020, 12:10:40 PM
I'd rather have a socialist president butting heads with congress than a dictator being encouraged by them.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 26, 2020, 12:33:21 PM
At times it just turned into a free-for-all. For me, the debate was discouraging because it highlighted just how split the Democratic party is. I have no idea how this is going to turn out but I worry that progressive Democrats won't turn out for a non-progressive candidate and vice versa.

My number one issue is healthcare. In an ideal world, Sander's plan would be the best because by taking the profit out of healthcare, money is saved and healthcare outcomes become the metric for success. The problem is the Sanders' plan has almost no chance of being approved by non-progressive Democrats and Republicans in Congress. To go from a profit-driven healthcare system straight to a profitless healthcare system with our current government is completely unrealistic. That means if I really want universal coverage I should support one of the candidates who will be able to work with non-progressive Democrats and Republicans to pass something that would hopefully look like the Swiss healthcare system.

If Buttigieg wasn't gay he would be my choice but I think the bias against LGBTQ people is too prevalent for him to win a general election. I feel like Biden is a step backward. I won't vote for Bloomberg on principle. Klobuchar and Steyer have no chance at this point. I don't think Warren is as good a politician as Sanders (and her rhetorical devices annoy me). That leads me back to Sanders.

The Swiss system is both private and public.  Unlike the NHS in GB.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 26, 2020, 12:41:12 PM
I'd rather have a socialist president butting heads with congress than a dictator being encouraged by them.

Caracas Now!  I love the smell of Venezuela burning in in the morning.  Got Hugo Chavez?

Remember the war on Black Men (and Yellow Men too) ... a real New Deal that was ...

You can have this ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k26hmRbDQFw

Or this ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KegsWP4Tvhg

Love those marching young women.  The American cowboy commander reminds me of Putin on horseback in Siberia!  President Putin 2020!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 26, 2020, 04:04:21 PM
The Swiss system is both private and public.  Unlike the NHS in GB.

Yes and I think Republicans might pass legislation for a similar healthcare system. It would give everyone healthcare coverage, prevent people from falling into bankruptcy and be much less expensive for the federal government. If this was passed then progressives could push for expanded benefits in the future.

https://youtu.be/gniCVinKkSo
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 26, 2020, 05:02:39 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5THs5NE5CI
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 26, 2020, 05:51:05 PM
At times it just turned into a free-for-all. For me, the debate was discouraging because it highlighted just how split the Democratic party is. I have no idea how this is going to turn out but I worry that progressive Democrats won't turn out for a non-progressive candidate and vice versa.

My number one issue is healthcare. In an ideal world, Sander's plan would be the best because by taking the profit out of healthcare, money is saved and healthcare outcomes become the metric for success. The problem is the Sanders' plan has almost no chance of being approved by non-progressive Democrats and Republicans in Congress. To go from a profit-driven healthcare system straight to a profitless healthcare system with our current government is completely unrealistic. That means if I really want universal coverage I should support one of the candidates who will be able to work with non-progressive Democrats and Republicans to pass something that would hopefully look like the Swiss healthcare system.

If Buttigieg wasn't gay he would be my choice but I think the bias against LGBTQ people is too prevalent for him to win a general election.
Too much metagaming and not enough gaming.

If you want universal healthcare, your candidate should reflect that.  Cause if you go with someone who won't fight for it, you're sure as hell never going to get it.

And Buttigieg being gay shouldn't even be a factor one way or the other.  Imagine if we were at the 1960 Democratic primary and we heard "I dunno if I can vote for JFK, other people might not go for a Catholic..."  Imagine how different things would be if his supporters were doing that sort of bigotry calculus.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 26, 2020, 06:02:43 PM
Yes and I think Republicans might pass legislation for a similar healthcare system. It would give everyone healthcare coverage, prevent people from falling into bankruptcy and be much less expensive for the federal government. If this was passed then progressives could push for expanded benefits in the future.

https://youtu.be/gniCVinKkSo

Two bad 1/3 Americans are Elephants and 1/3 are Donkeys ;-)

There was a lot of anti-Catholic bigotry in 1960, but probably not among JFK supporters.  The Pope would have excommunicated them.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 26, 2020, 06:04:34 PM
I have no idea how this is going to turn out but I worry that progressive Democrats won't turn out for a non-progressive candidate and vice versa.
One thing we know for a fact:  non-progressives can and have and will vote for a progressive.  If they didn't, there wouldn't be a progressive on the ballot or a progressive winning delegates.  QED.

Also:  https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/02/regular-democrats-arent-least-bit-worried-about-bernie/606688/
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 26, 2020, 07:52:42 PM
Too much metagaming and not enough gaming.

If you want universal healthcare, your candidate should reflect that.  Cause if you go with someone who won't fight for it, you're sure as hell never going to get it.

And Buttigieg being gay shouldn't even be a factor one way or the other.  Imagine if we were at the 1960 Democratic primary and we heard "I dunno if I can vote for JFK, other people might not go for a Catholic..."  Imagine how different things would be if his supporters were doing that sort of bigotry calculus.

I think you are correct that I am overthinking it. I should just vote for the candidate who best represents my interests regardless of electability, which is Andrew Yang. I'm going to be voting for whomever the Democrats put forward.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 26, 2020, 11:39:01 PM
Unfortunately, SC debate was unsupervised ice cream tossing fight in a kindergarten, with no teacher present.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on February 27, 2020, 01:50:09 AM
Still haven't made up my mind, and the Ohio primary is in about two and a half weeks.  Biden and Sanders are too old for what's arguably one of the most stressful jobs there is.  Bloomberg -- just no.  We've had three presidents whose primary background was business rather than public service or the military, and all three were disasters: Hoover, Bush Jr, and the current one.

I like Buttigieg, but I'd like to see him have a bit more experience under his belt -- even so, I'm keeping him on my list.  I'm vacillating between him, Klobuchar and Warren.  This may be the first time in a long time that I end up making my decision in the voting booth.

Granted, if the nomination goes to Biden, Sanders or Bloomberg, they're all a damn sight better than Lord Dampnut...
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 27, 2020, 07:46:27 AM
I am still supporting Buttigieg ... I would vote for anyone the CIA/FBI approves.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 27, 2020, 11:38:32 AM
What are polls worth?

South Carolina - Biden, Sanders, Steyer?

Super Tuesday:
California - Sanders, Warren, Biden, Buttigieg, Bloomberg
Texas - Sanders, Biden, Warren, Bloomberg
North Carolina - Sanders, Biden, Bloomberg, Warren

So bump for Biden on Saturday, then Sanders all the way on Tuesday
National Dem ranking - Sanders, Biden, Bloomberg, Warren, Buttigieg

So which loser will Sanders choose as his VP candidate?  Hillary?  Raul Castro?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 27, 2020, 12:20:25 PM
So which loser will Sanders choose as his VP candidate?  Hillary?  Raul Castro?

I've read a lot of comments from Sanders supporters who would like Nina Turner.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1ObX0iDRjo&t=70s
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on February 27, 2020, 02:11:41 PM
Maybe they should just put all the Democratic candidates in a cage and see which one survives, making him/her the nominee.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 27, 2020, 03:43:13 PM
Maybe they should just put all the Democratic candidates in a cage and see which one survives, making him/her the nominee.

I would predict the old and short would lose, so a good plan.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 27, 2020, 03:44:18 PM
"Bloomberg, In Freudian Slip, Brags He "Bought" Democratic Majority In The House In 2018" ... some Russians spend $50,000 on Facebook in 2016, Bloomberg has spent how much in 2018 and 2020 so far?  I consider NYC to be a foreign and hostile country ;-)

""You Had To Be Fairly Wealthy": $1,750 To $3,200  Ticket Prices For Dem Debate Spark Disgust" ... I once saw candidate Bill Clinton for free.  Dems are just so many plutocrats now.

"'Not A Real Democrat' – Florida Lawsuit Seeks To Exclude Bernie Sanders From Primary Ballot" ... known this since 2016, Dems are awfully slow ...
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 27, 2020, 03:58:35 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PjNlBV-_s8

A good video for "but how's he gonna deliver???" people to watch.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 27, 2020, 04:40:32 PM
Unless you get a revolution, you have to get Congress and SCOTUS to play along.  With the right CIA/FBI persuasion, I assume it could be done.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 28, 2020, 05:01:56 AM
After going to the polls and staring at the ballot for several minutes, I ended up voting for Pete Buttigieg. Out of the viable candidates, he is the one whose policies I most agree with, plus he's intelligent and appears to be a decent person. I'm still very skeptical that a gay man can be president in 2020 but it's possible that my personal experience, job and location have skewed my perspective.  I'll vote for whichever candidates the Democrats choose, even Montgomery Burns Michael Bloomberg. While I was there two buses of young people pulled up to vote, which was good to see.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 28, 2020, 11:05:31 AM
After going to the polls and staring at the ballot for several minutes, I ended up voting for Pete Buttigieg. Out of the viable candidates, he is the one whose policies I most agree with, plus he's intelligent and appears to be a decent person. I'm still very skeptical that a gay man can be president in 2020 but it's possible that my personal experience, job and location have skewed my perspective.  I'll vote for whichever candidates the Democrats choose, even Montgomery Burns Michael Bloomberg. While I was there two buses of young people pulled up to vote, which was good to see.

What, you didn't vote for one of the fossils?  Are you a agist bigot? ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 28, 2020, 01:47:04 PM
Interesting video on how Sanders answers a question compared to Trump. It's another reason why I think Sanders has a good chance winning the presidency compared to some of the other Democrats. Put a populist against a populist.

https://youtu.be/16S2lQn5xgs
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on February 28, 2020, 03:30:53 PM
How poll respondents described the 2020 candidates in one (or a few) words.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/02/28/jerk-liars-inexperienced-how-voters-describe-2020-candidates/

(https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/XICWSKNK3NHNFLOZD5EZGRMK5U.jpg&)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 28, 2020, 03:55:06 PM
Interesting video on how Sanders answers a question compared to Trump. It's another reason why I think Sanders has a good chance winning the presidency compared to some of the other Democrats. Put a populist against a populist.

https://youtu.be/16S2lQn5xgs
He'd be particularly good against Trump just because he can take a punch and pivot to policy, where Trump is glaringly weak.  That's the right counter.

Clinton tried to respond to Trump's MAGA slogan with "America's already great".  Bad move.  It really hurt her in the eyes of people struggling to make ends meet.

I really don't want to see a replay of that disaster in November, with a glassjaw "centrist" trying to counter Trump with admonishments of decorum.  That's not going to work.

And I definitely don't want to see the DNC fall even further in the eyes of people who aren't diehard Democrats with another super delegate shitshow.

We'll see if history repeats itself or if those involved have grown wiser.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SvZurich on February 28, 2020, 04:51:06 PM
I am so pleased Bernie won Nevada!  May he keep making the DNC shit bricks as voters support him!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 28, 2020, 06:27:41 PM
Typical voter … what would I feel if I met this politician in person?  In 2000/2004 many Americans liked George W,   because they could see themselves enjoying a beer with him.  Elizabeth Warren tried to catch that vibe, but failed.

Loud obnoxious NYC people are not the most popular.  Justifiably, Texans are ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on February 29, 2020, 08:26:27 PM
South Carolina Primary 20% counted

Biden - 52% - expected
Sanders - 18% - expected
Steyer - 11% - stand-in for Bloomberg when not on ballot?
Buttigieg - 8% - expected
Warren - 7% - disappointing
Klobuchar - 3% - disappointing
Gabbard  - 1% - Go Tulsi!
Total - 100%
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SvZurich on February 29, 2020, 08:55:29 PM
See where education cuts lead?  They lead to higher totals for the hand picked DNC candidates and Trump.  ;)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 29, 2020, 11:49:02 PM
Joe Biden wins big in SC, Steyer drops out

(https://media1.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2020_09/3250366/dem_white_voters_for_biden_and_sanders_hcomp_south_carolina_dd28ef1fc92c2122e18c46d07dd03e3e.fit-760w.png)

Biden's victory was mainly due to the fairly high age of the SC primary voters, with Biden winning the Boomer crowd hands down.  Definitely a silver lining for his campaign, pun intended.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on February 29, 2020, 11:56:21 PM
Another interesting tidbit:

(https://media3.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2020_09/3250136/dem_medicare_for_all_hcomp_south_carolina_87a95886b69627e284a68b656717060d.fit-560w.png)

A majority of democrats in all four states support medicare for all, though SC is noticeably weaker on this than the other states.  Sanders, a medicare for all candidate, got the popular vote in the first three states but lost SC, where support for medicare for all is weaker.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on March 01, 2020, 07:01:41 AM
Medicare for all sounds good.  I've got Medicare and I'm grateful, but it's still not as good as the program an average Canadian has access to in Canada's universal system.  Medicare is NOT full coverage, and even paying for part B out of pocket is still not full coverage.  You are still hundreds of dollars a month away from full coverage.  I also buy supplemental from AARP, and that still doesn't cover everything.  I stop buying extra coverage there. Medicare it costs me about $400 each month out of pocket.  It's cheaper than Obamacare by a long shot, but still a large monthly expense.

The problem with Medicare is that it still leaves a large gap, and fails to take the private insurers out of the picture, leaving them free to lobby for fewer Medicare advantages forcing voters back under corporate thumbs.  So while Medicare For All is far better than Obamacare, it is still open to greedy corporate meddling.  I think it's appealing to most Americans who think Medicare is something like universal coverage, which it clearly is not.  But going to the bargaining table asking for Medicare handicaps our bargaining position greatly.

Improving Obamacare has been the rallying cry of most of those seeking the presidential nomination in the Democratic party because it's what corporate contributors want, but most of those contenders are now out of contention for the nomination.  Voters appear to want something else.  And they appear to be forced to vote for Sanders, even though he yells and waves his arms around like some cranky old fart.  Imagine how well much more polished speakers like Buttigieg, Warren, or even Biden with nothing more than his name recognition might have done with the Sander's message.

Obamacare doesn't address the problem of costs.  It just shifts the process of paying for insurance around, and then pretends it's now affordable.  The "baby steps" argument supporting Obamacare is just a way of supporting the old system.  Early on, the central committee decided that the party would be better off defending "Fixing Obamacare" as a better strategy than actually doing something.  I think it was the wrong strategy, but it's not my business, so I'll stop there.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SvZurich on March 01, 2020, 08:37:27 AM
I am very spoiled by the socialism of the Veterans Administration system.  I don't have insurance, but for government tax purposes it counts.  I pay $15 for a doctor's visit, $15 typically for a 3 month supply of a medicine (usually, rarely I pay less), get some items for free, and can make use of any meetings/programs for free.  I did not retire, I was fired for being queer on my 2nd enlistment, and all of this is covered because I was honorably discharged.  I want EVERYONE to have a system similar to this.  More people having healthcare (and paid sick leave) means fewer disease vectors festering.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 01, 2020, 09:00:01 AM
More people having healthcare (and paid sick leave) means fewer disease vectors festering.
Exactly.  I've got news for people who "don't want to pay for other people's healthcare".  When another big pandemic hits, that guy making your pizza came to work sick.  The guy delivering your packages came to work sick. The guy serving you drinks came to work sick.  Not because they're intentionally trying to make other people sick, but because they're living paycheck to paycheck and they can't afford to stay home, their employer doesn't give them any paid sick leave, and they can barely afford to keep the lights on, let alone outrageously expensive health insurance.

Don't want to pay for it?  You absolutely will pay for it, one way or the other.  I'm begging you, choose the one with less human misery all around.  There are less pitchforks down that road, as well.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 01, 2020, 10:27:14 AM
I am very spoiled by the socialism of the Veterans Administration system.  I don't have insurance, but for government tax purposes it counts.  I pay $15 for a doctor's visit, $15 typically for a 3 month supply of a medicine (usually, rarely I pay less), get some items for free, and can make use of any meetings/programs for free.  I did not retire, I was fired for being queer on my 2nd enlistment, and all of this is covered because I was honorably discharged.  I want EVERYONE to have a system similar to this.  More people having healthcare (and paid sick leave) means fewer disease vectors festering.

Enlist now!  Service equals citizenship!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 01, 2020, 10:29:59 AM
South Carolina Primary 100% counted

Biden - 48% - expected
Sanders - 20% - expected
Steyer - 11% - stand-in for Bloomberg when not on ballot?
Buttigieg - 8% - expected
Warren - 7% - disappointing
Klobuchar - 3% - disappointing
Gabbard  - 1% - Go Tulsi!
Total - 98%
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Jason Harvestdancer on March 01, 2020, 06:32:19 PM
Biden just got the victory necessary to stay in the race, after losing three times to Sanders.  When is Warren finally going to drop out?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 01, 2020, 07:04:36 PM
Biden just got the victory necessary to stay in the race, after losing three times to Sanders.  When is Warren finally going to drop out?

Bwahaha … Warren is Sanders-lite.  Warren will be invited to be Biden's running mate.  And to remind him what state he is currently campaigning in ;-)  Wait for it …. Wednesday morning, after super-duper-Tuesday … will the California voters get past their weed smoke to the voting booth?  Bloomberg will be running as himself, not thru his stand-in, Steyer.  I predict Sanders will take California.

They say … dum dum dum … after super-duper-Tuesday, Biden will be out of money.  Bloomberg can still use money for toilet paper.

If Warren doesn't take Massachusetts (home state) she will need to drink something stronger than beer!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 01, 2020, 09:04:21 PM
Buttigieg dropped out. I'm a bit surprised he did it before Super Tuesday. Political analysts say this is supposed to help Biden.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 01, 2020, 09:34:09 PM
Biden just got the victory necessary to stay in the race, after losing three times to Sanders.  When is Warren finally going to drop out?
Her campaign claims that she isn't going to drop out because she still has a path to victory under the logic that the supporters of people dropping out are going to switch to Warren.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/01/warren-hail-mary-strategy-nomination-118319
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on March 01, 2020, 10:18:21 PM
Still up in the air about who I'm voting for in two weeks when the primary season comes here.  I know who it won't be, but I haven't decided yet who it will be.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 02, 2020, 03:22:55 AM
Her campaign claims that she isn't going to drop out because she still has a path to victory under the logic that the supporters of people dropping out are going to switch to Warren.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/01/warren-hail-mary-strategy-nomination-118319

A theory is being floated that Buttigieg agreed to drop out to be Warren's VP.

She has been publicly distancing herself from Sanders in the past few weeks, while at the same time quietly winding back a lot of her most left-leaning proposals, including Medicare for All. Warren has been struggling in caucuses and primaries, but has promised to stay in until the Democratic convention in July; so she’s either bluffing or she’s been concocting a strategy to inject new energy into her campaign with someone else behind the scenes. If it’s not a case of a VP deal, however, it could be a much more straightforward and less risky case of Buttigieg throwing his weight behind Biden and guaranteeing himself a prestigious cabinet position in the event of a future Biden administration. ...

In a moving speech in Indiana tonight opened by his husband Chasten, Buttigieg declared that he felt he had a political "responsibility" to step away, and spoke of supporting a candidate with a "broad base" (so, not Sanders) who offered a "new kind of politics" (which didn't exactly sound like Biden either.) ...


https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/mayor-pete-buttigieg-drop-out-reason-speech-bernie-sanders-biden-warren-back-room-deal-a9367721.html
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 02, 2020, 06:39:15 AM
That's certainly possible, though it seems bizarre for a candidate with 26 delegates to throw in the towel in favor of a candidate with 8 delegates.  That math doesn't seem to add up.

I read on 538 that Buttigeg's campaign was running out of funds and unlikely to have a good showing on Super Tuesday, so leaving now allowed him to finish on a high note, which makes sense.

That said, I also have a sneaking suspicion that there's a level of coordination between seemingly combative campaigns to ensure an end result that the party leadership is happy with, regardless of whether that end result accurately reflects voters' wishes.  *cough cough*  We'll see.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on March 02, 2020, 01:24:20 PM


Quote
A Guardian USA investigation reveals that Bernie Sanders could be cheated out of 553,000 votes in California.  The twisted primary voting system created by the DNC and enforced by the Secretary of State (a Biden supporter) is certain to cost Sanders hundreds of thousands of young and LatinX votes.


Greg Palast:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-26NiTLxu_Y
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on March 02, 2020, 01:34:46 PM
The inner circle has their own vision of the future.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on March 02, 2020, 01:39:38 PM
Yeah, human extinction is their vision.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 02, 2020, 02:45:33 PM

Greg Palast:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-26NiTLxu_Y

People who register Independent rather than Democrat or Republican need to specify when the go to the polls they want to vote in the Democrat or Republican primary. An information card is mailed to registered Independents reminding them of this process. People working the polls are not allowed to asked Independents if they would like to vote in the Democrat or Republican primaries so as not to influence voters. Young and LatinX voters are assumed to be too ignorant to understand this process, which hurts Bernie and Bloomberg because they poll higher in these demographics. Am I missing something?


Klobuchar is now out.

... and then there were four.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on March 02, 2020, 03:00:42 PM
It's like the Highlander - there can be only ONE!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 02, 2020, 04:43:22 PM
That's certainly possible, though it seems bizarre for a candidate with 26 delegates to throw in the towel in favor of a candidate with 8 delegates.  That math doesn't seem to add up.

I read on 538 that Buttigeg's campaign was running out of funds and unlikely to have a good showing on Super Tuesday, so leaving now allowed him to finish on a high note, which makes sense.

That said, I also have a sneaking suspicion that there's a level of coordination between seemingly combative campaigns to ensure an end result that the party leadership is happy with, regardless of whether that end result accurately reflects voters' wishes.  *cough cough*  We'll see.

When Bloomberg first said he was getting in the race, pundits said he was there to prevent Buttigieg from getting traction, not to block Sanders.  But yes, Buttigieg was my #2 after Tulsi Gabbard.  Still hoping a bus will hit the other candidates so she is the last one standing … and she won't step aside for Hillary!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 02, 2020, 04:49:56 PM
Last polls before Super-Duper-Tuesday … for the 4 most important primaries …

California - Sanders wins
Texas - Sanders wins
North Carolina - toss between Sanders and Biden
Massachusetts - toss between Sanders and Warren

If Warren isn't #1 in Massachusetts, she will be out.

All those 4 polls put Bloomberg at 15% of the vote.  Short man, short delegate count!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Jason Harvestdancer on March 03, 2020, 11:36:44 AM
So it is coming down to either Bernie wins before the convention or he is the lead but not victor going into a brokered convention.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 03, 2020, 07:57:19 PM
So it is coming down to either Bernie wins before the convention or he is the lead but not victor going into a brokered convention.
Yep, and considering he was the only one who unequivocally agreed that the election should be decided by votes, that latter outcome is a very dangerous possibility for the Democratic Party.

People tend to not want to vote in the general if they were screwed out of their vote in the primary.

And unless everyone here is a-okay with Pence's brand of religious "freedom" for 4 more years, that's an outcome best avoided.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on March 04, 2020, 02:09:16 AM
I'm just satisfied that the preliminary results show that Bloomberg got kicked in the balls tonight.  I hope it's not down to just Biden v Bernie when it gets here in two weeks.  I like them both, but FFS at 76 and 78 they're too damn old for what has to be considered one of the hardest jobs on the planet.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on March 04, 2020, 05:00:05 AM
Well, I guess Democratic voters are not as progressive as I thought.  I never saw that Biden surge coming, although early on I was of the opinion that Biden's name recognition would make him a shoe in.  One thing I found interesting during my very limited watch of the coverage last night was that exit polls said Biden, but also showed rather overwhelming support for socialism, much higher than I would have thought, being as most people think socialism is Communism, which the talking heads said that was very good for Sanders, but turned out to be wrong.  The race just became a little less interesting to me, but I never felt fired up over any of it before.  I liked Sanders' vision, but I found no candidates stimulating, and most downright boring.

In the past, Biden didn't even bother running against a lackluster Clinton, who always lost to someone else, and now we're going to run him against Trump. Trump wasn't actually as bad as I thought he would be.  Don't get me wrong, I thought he was really bad, but here we are still alive and well, and I can't wait for the next episode of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on March 04, 2020, 05:39:45 AM
I just heard this morning that 50% of undecided voters decided to vote for Joe Biden at the last minute.  This is not the kind of interest the Democratic party needs.  That was followed by one talking head saying what Biden has to do next is tell voters what he can do for them, not just how much he was part of the Obama administration.  I was thinking the same thing during the debates.  I couldn't connect to him as a person.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 04, 2020, 06:49:39 AM
Well, I guess Democratic voters are not as progressive as I thought. 

Not enough younger, more progressive Democrats showed up at the polls. In Alabama, only 7% of the voters were in the 17-29 range compared to 14% in 2016. In North Carolina, 13% of Tuesday’s electorate were young voters, compared to 16% four years ago. In Texas, 16% of voters were between 17 and 29 compared to 20% in 2016. A Sanders victory depends on young voters and this poor turn out doesn't bode well.

Trump wasn't actually as bad as I thought he would be.  Don't get me wrong, I thought he was really bad, but here we are still alive and well, and I can't wait for the next episode of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.

I've heard this sentiment more often recently when I talk to people in person. I suspect a lot of people post grievances online giving the impression that a disproportionate number of people are dissatisfied. Content or apathetic people tend not to talk about it.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 04, 2020, 06:59:35 AM
Everybody send poor Elizabeth Warren a six pack of beer so she can drown her sorrows.

Bloomberg is still in, even as #3

Sanders got the MJ state votes, Utah, Colorado, California, Vermont.

The Deep State must have pushed Biden forward, they need more oligarch graft in Ukraine and more pictures of Creep Joe being creepy, so they can blackmail him in office.

Not even half over, so hang onto your pussy hats!  Best women can do this year (Go Tulsi!) is VP.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on March 04, 2020, 10:15:43 AM
I've heard this sentiment more often recently when I talk to people in person. I suspect a lot of people post grievances online giving the impression that a disproportionate number of people are dissatisfied. Content or apathetic people tend not to talk about it.
Just to be clear, I'm not satisfied.  I'm just alive and not in a hospital.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: PopeyesPappy on March 04, 2020, 10:42:45 AM
People who register Independent rather than Democrat or Republican need to specify when the go to the polls they want to vote in the Democrat or Republican primary. An information card is mailed to registered Independents reminding them of this process. People working the polls are not allowed to asked Independents if they would like to vote in the Democrat or Republican primaries so as not to influence voters. Young and LatinX voters are assumed to be too ignorant to understand this process, which hurts Bernie and Bloomberg because they poll higher in these demographics. Am I missing something?

That's not how it works everywhere. Here you don't register as anything. When you show up to vote in the primaries there are separate ballots for the different parties. You have to ask for the one you want.

But if you vote for one party in the primaries you are only allowed to vote for that party if there are runoff elections. This helps keep people from voting for their favorite candidates in the primary then casting a vote for the opposition party candidate they think has the best chance of losing in a runoff election. It's a new procedure here. It was put in place after the 2017 special election that put Doug Jones in the senate. During that election a lot of democrats voted for Roy Moore in the republican runoff because they thought he could be beat. He won, and he got beat in the general election. If Luther Strange had won the runoff he most likely would have beat Doug Jones in the general election.

In general elections there is only one ballot and you can vote for whoever you want.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Jason Harvestdancer on March 04, 2020, 10:55:17 AM
Yep.  The last minute drop-outs did push Biden back into the lead ... until his next big gaffe.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 04, 2020, 04:13:21 PM
(https://i.redd.it/3tyq4hvownk41.jpg)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 04, 2020, 04:27:09 PM
(https://i.redd.it/7ynavodxgjk41.jpg)

Hmmmm...
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 04, 2020, 05:26:21 PM
Just to be clear, I'm not satisfied.  I'm just alive and not in a hospital.

Glad to hear it.  Since "fusion" memes are good, how about a luxury hospital aboard a cruise ship?  Damn, already been done!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 04, 2020, 06:15:28 PM
"Google Refuses To Run Trump, Sanders Ads" .... Emperor Xi has the Mandate Of Heaven.  George H W Bush (CIA head and ambassador to China before being VP and POTUS) was the original Manchurian Candidate?  Did he get pointers from Deep Kraut aka Henry Kissinger?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 04, 2020, 06:18:15 PM
Bloomberg has suspended his campaign, endorsing Biden (snicker) so he can concentrate on spending billions for the general election and POTUS election, so the DNC doesn't have to.  What a generous guy!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 04, 2020, 07:10:55 PM
Bloomberg has suspended his campaign, endorsing Biden (snicker) so he can concentrate on spending billions for the general election and POTUS election, so the DNC doesn't have to.  What a generous guy!

According to Andrew Yang, Bloomberg has a massive digital operations center that dwarfs the DNC resources.

"I had coffee with a marketing staffer from my campaign, and I was concerned what are you going to do next. And he said, 'Don’t worry about it. I’m working at the Bloomberg campaign, and they’re paying me two and a half times what I got paid here,'" Yang told his fellow CNN panelists.

"They have this massive operation that is leaps and bounds ahead of anything the DNC is employing in terms of data and resources," he continued.

Taking into account how deep pockets didn't adequately help billionaire Tom Steyer, who dropped from the race Saturday evening, Yang made the case that Bloomberg's "digital war room" is what sets the former New York City mayor apart from the rest.

"They've got this incredible data projection down to the district, down to the delegate, and they're mapping it and simulating it," he said, before describing how Bloomberg's long game may be focused on targeting and taking out opponents individually. ...


(https://thefinalcurtaincall.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/architecte-3129757eb1.jpg)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on March 04, 2020, 08:33:28 PM
I'm pretty well decided now that when the primary comes here, I'm voting Warren (if she's still in the race).  Bernie's and Joe's ages raise serious concerns in my mind.  Also, I can see Warren negotiating where I can see Bernie refusing to and letting 'perfect' be the enemy of 'better'.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 04, 2020, 10:59:13 PM
Biden and Bloomberg were both "friends" of Epstein.  Warren was not.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 05, 2020, 12:02:08 AM
Well, I think Sanders is just wanting to be bought off, as in 2016.  He needs a 4th house!  Warren, if she holds out, is just trying to be on the VP candidate map.  So really, by June this is all Biden, with Obama/Hillary as silent partners.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 05, 2020, 12:59:36 AM
Cartoon news, one week old, still fresh!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0byiYMvINPo&list=PLZ8c54cxQG2HOBMD-2uiKKOV4qagowMdM&index=2
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 05, 2020, 08:08:33 AM
According to Andrew Yang, Bloomberg has a massive digital operations center that dwarfs the DNC resources.
Interesting.  Wasn't Bloomberg the one who said that Sanders would be mathematically impossible to beat unless people started dropping out and consolidating their votes?  Hmmm...
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 05, 2020, 09:47:24 AM
"DNC Scrambles To Change Debate Threshold After Gabbard Qualifies" ... they are excluding the only good Dem candidate!  The Dem party exists only to stroke Hillary's bruised ego and provide more nymphs for Bill.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 05, 2020, 10:17:59 AM
"DNC Scrambles To Change Debate Threshold After Gabbard Qualifies" ... they are excluding the only good Dem candidate!  The Dem party exists only to stroke Hillary's bruised ego and provide more nymphs for Bill.

I'm sure the DNC would rather not have Tulsi Gabbard asking uncomfortable questions and jeopardizing the Bernie or Biden narrative.

https://youtu.be/f7-9qF0sMyk
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 05, 2020, 01:04:42 PM
Interesting.  Wasn't Bloomberg the one who said that Sanders would be mathematically impossible to beat unless people started dropping out and consolidating their votes?  Hmmm...

Some analysts say, Warren helped lower Sander's count on Tuesday, helping Biden.  But to what effect, if as per rumor, she will leave the race today?  I say, chip all the Dems, and then signal to these cyborgs, who to vote for like the Trade Federation robots (who had a weakness exploited by Jar Jar).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdS2kCUGvfo

But Darth Vader has an even greater weakness ... he sunk all his money into Jar Jar Binks action figures, before Phantom Menace was released to the theaters!!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 05, 2020, 02:59:52 PM
"VOTER FRAUD FEAR AS CONSERVATIVE GROUP FINDS COUNTIES WITH MORE VOTERS THAN ACTUAL PEOPLE" ... similar to evidence from 2018.  Florida, Michigan and Colorado find counties with more voters than population.

I don't often vote, but when I am dead, I always vote Democrat ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 05, 2020, 04:18:30 PM
I'm sure the DNC would rather not have Tulsi Gabbard asking uncomfortable questions and jeopardizing the Bernie or Biden narrative.
I legitimately forgot she was still in the race.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 05, 2020, 04:22:00 PM
Some analysts say, Warren helped lower Sander's count on Tuesday, helping Biden.
It was undoubtedly a factor.  Though with Bloomberg dropping out as well, a lot of his voters will switch to Biden, so it's pretty much a wash.

Bernie's going to have to claw his way back to the lead without much outside assistance, unlike Biden.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 05, 2020, 05:02:48 PM
Bernie's going to have to claw his way back to the lead without much outside assistance, unlike Biden.

Reading online comments from Bernie supporters following Super Tuesday, it appears they have a bit of a conundrum. They want Bernie to stay true to his progressive message and start a "revolution" but now they realize they don't have enough progressive voters, particularly young voters, to win the Democratic nomination. They need more moderates and centrists, many of whom want "unity", specifically Trump gone and more bipartisan cooperation. They want to literally go back to pre-2016 politics with Biden. So should Bernie adjust his message to appeal to moderates or, as some supporters have insisted, double-down and run a negative campaign against Biden? I don't know what Bernie should do at this point.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 05, 2020, 05:46:12 PM
They need more moderates and centrists, many of whom want "unity", specifically Trump gone and more bipartisan cooperation.They want to literally go back to pre-2016 politics with Biden. So should Bernie adjust his message to appeal to moderates or, as some supporters have insisted, double-down and run a negative campaign against Biden? I don't know what Bernie should do at this point.
Secular Talk explained it better than I can, but I'll take a crack at it.

First, Sanders has a much broader appeal than just progressives.  If it were just progressives, he probably wouldn't carry a single state.  The platform he's fighting for has broad appeal: "young" voters (under 45), very liberal, liberal-leaning independents, even a decent inroads into conservative-leaning Republicans.  His populist message could peel a lot of votes from Trump.  And in Nevada, he had a plurality of conservative and moderate Democrats.

That said, young voters didn't vote as much as they should have and Biden now has a lot of support from old and/or conservative Democrats.

Second, he has to absolutely crush  the next debate.  No doubt about that.  But if you guys recall, Biden has historically had some trouble in debates, so it's possible.

Third, Sanders supporters have to work extra hard in mobilizing voters and attracting the voters of the dropped out candidates.

Should Sanders go super negative?  I dunno, but I hope not.  I think that getting vicious would just fracture the already pretty cracked Democratic Party and lead to a weak November showing, with the embittered losing faction staying home on election day.

That said, this is a warmup for the general election and you better believe that Trump isn't going to hold any punches.  You can't even imagine how low he's going to go.  Biden's recent fogginess is a delight for Trump.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 05, 2020, 07:53:52 PM
Reading online comments from Bernie supporters following Super Tuesday, it appears they have a bit of a conundrum. They want Bernie to stay true to his progressive message and start a "revolution" but now they realize they don't have enough progressive voters, particularly young voters, to win the Democratic nomination. They need more moderates and centrists, many of whom want "unity", specifically Trump gone and more bipartisan cooperation. They want to literally go back to pre-2016 politics with Biden. So should Bernie adjust his message to appeal to moderates or, as some supporters have insisted, double-down and run a negative campaign against Biden? I don't know what Bernie should do at this point.

Any big tent political party has to please so many sociopaths, that it is hard without group hallucination, to keep them in the same tent.

I don't blame the voters, i blame the DNC sex slaves of the Klinton Klan.  I refuse to believe that 1/3 of adult America can't do better than Biden or Sanders.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 05, 2020, 08:07:50 PM
I refuse to believe that 1/3 of adult America can't do better than Biden or Sanders.
Well, I mean, we could dig up FDR and do some black magic...
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 05, 2020, 08:28:06 PM
Well, I mean, we could dig up FDR and do some black magic...

He was controversial and widely hated.  Pearl Harbor saved his reputation (even though he arranged for it to happen).  FDR didn't need black magic, he had Churchill.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 05, 2020, 08:34:42 PM
Socialist law enforcement being tried in San Francisco now.  A new law was passed decriminalizing theft of less than $950.  The usual suspects invaded a Walgreens there and stripped the makeup section ;-)  Local official responsible for this madness, is a child of 60s terrorists.

https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/shoplifters-walking-into-stores-filling-bags-walking-out-of-stores-in-san-francisco-criminal-justice-reform/

With President Sanders, this is what "reparations" look like.  And why it is necessary to disarm people.  Because it isn't nice to shoot robbers who are by definition innocent, while society is always guilty ;-(

I am not wealthy and try not to look wealthy.  I would rather the barbarian hordes concentrate on my neighbor's home.  Of course it won't matter if per pandemic, we are all dead in the US in less than 2 months from now.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 05, 2020, 08:37:41 PM
He was controversial and widely hated.
So were/are Rock music and D&D.

I'm sorry but being hated by dumbasses isn't a black mark, it's a badge of pride.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 05, 2020, 08:54:56 PM
So were/are Rock music and D&D.

I'm sorry but being hated by dumbasses isn't a black mark, it's a badge of pride.

Watch out who you label, the label maker is coming for you ;-)

A decade of bad politics, bad drugs, bad sex and bad music.  I know some cool people, I don't judge their choices.  But I do separate the goats from the sheep as a reference to my own character.

No hate, not even pity, I just won't praise crap.

Fire breathing political activists should practice practice practice ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRTKXMy4WVc
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on March 06, 2020, 12:41:40 AM
Dammit, every time I settle on a first choice, they drop out!

Fortunately I’m a rationalist and a realist, otherwise I might worry that my decision to back a candidate is not merely the kiss of death but actually getting frenched by the Grim Reaper.

That said, I’m sorry, Joe, I will be voting for you in the primary—and good luck with that.  While I align more ideologically with Bernie, the disaster the Oval Orifice is going to leave behind is going to need executive experience from day one.  Simply put, Biden has the longer and more relevant résumé.  So much is broken that needs to be fixed ASAP, and that’s going to take a united Democratic front.

Bernie can take pride in waking up the liberal and progressive wing of the party after a long dormancy.  His candidacies have reminded us that ‘Democrat’ should not be ‘centrist Republican’, and almost single-handed he’s stopped the rightward drift of political discussion and put the liberal agenda back on the menu.

But one Bernie in the White House this year is impotent without the necessary political infrastructure to enact the agenda.  We don’t need one Bernie in the White House now.  We need thousands on our school boards and city councils, as our county commissioners and judges, in our state houses an all over Congress, over the next several decades.

Taking back our country only starts with the election this fall.  Bernie’s supporters are the ideological shock troops the Democrats have needed for forty years, a counterbalance to the (Im)moral Majority and the teabaggers—except not evil.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 06, 2020, 09:02:42 AM
Same thing happened to me ... first Tulsi, then Buttigieg ... but Tulsi hasn't dropped out.  Just Fauxahontas ;-)  Yes, Biden is less evil than Hillary.  Bernie and Joe are at the top for now, because the other candidates were that much weaker.  Please compare to Trump rallies that are larger than the whole turnout of the Dems, given that his primaries are basically uncontested.  Still hoping Tulsi will run as Independent, get elected, and jail the Clintons and Bidens.  Bernie may be a fraud, but he isn't a crook.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 06, 2020, 11:43:28 AM
Why does socialism look attractive?  Innumeracy ...

"'Bloomberg Could Have Given Every American $1Million' - Liberal Media Math Exposed In Stunning Interview" ... given $700 million, Bloomberg could have made 700 Americans a millionaire (at one million dollars each).

Of course there is the innumeracy, of just printing money out of nothing.  Today this just means adding an additional zero to the Feds magic spreadsheet.  No trees have to die ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Zimbabwe_$100_trillion_2009_Obverse.jpg

Marxist money.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 06, 2020, 06:02:10 PM
"NYT RUNS STORY CLAIMING BERNIE IS ACTUALLY AN ASSET OF THE SOVIET UNION, WITH PROOF!!" ... if you think the NYT isn't total shit, coming from the Deep State/Klinton Klan ... they sat on this info for decades until it was opportune ...
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SvZurich on March 06, 2020, 07:42:14 PM
"NYT RUNS STORY CLAIMING BERNIE IS ACTUALLY AN ASSET OF THE SOVIET UNION, WITH PROOF!!" ... if you think the NYT isn't total shit, coming from the Deep State/Klinton Klan ... they sat on this info for decades until it was opportune ...

All because he was doing a Reagan program as the Mayor of Burlington, Vermont.  One of many sister city promotions to promote understanding and attempt to lower the threat of nuclear war.  It was a Gorbachav/Reagan initiative. 

The way the Washington Post, NY Times, and MSDNC (MSNBC is a DNC front judging by their actions) keep slamming Bernie and promoting wars has really made me question their bias and stop trusting them.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 06, 2020, 08:12:48 PM
Dammit, every time I settle on a first choice, they drop out!
Hopefully, that streak isn't over yet!

Quote
While I align more ideologically with Bernie
"...I can't bring myself to vote for him for reasons X, Y, Z."  I hear this all the time from centrist Democrats.

Well, if you favor progressive reforms, and there's a champion of progressive reforms the likes of which we haven't seen for decades and he has a viable shot at the White House - you absolutely should support that candidate with every fiber of your being.

You should be on that like white on rice.  Why?  Because if you aren't going to fight for your values, no one in power will fight for them either.  Why would they?  If you vote for a Medicare-for-some candidate, you're showing that you don't really care about Medicare-for-all and that keeping things more or less the same is just fine by you.

If you can't bring yourself to take the most basic action to support progressive reforms, are you truly ideologically aligned with Bernie?

There has never been a better time to support progressive reforms.  And for once in a long time, we finally get the chance to fight FOR something good, not just against something terrible.  You have to decide if you're in or out, and that decision is going to be made at the ballot box.  And by the way, Medicare-for-all is basically the new gay rights for Democrats - a single, galvanizing issue of critical importance at this time.  Posterity is going to look back at where people stood and judge them harshly.

Quote
Simply put, Biden has the longer and more relevant résumé.
Granted, Bernie has never been Veep, but he's been in politics for the last 40 years.  Longer than Obama.  Longer than Hillary.  Longer than most of the other candidates.  To get a more experienced candidate, you'd need to get a shovel.

Quote
Bernie can take pride in waking up the liberal and progressive wing of the party after a long dormancy.  His candidacies have reminded us that ‘Democrat’ should not be ‘centrist Republican’, and almost single-handed he’s stopped the rightward drift of political discussion and put the liberal agenda back on the menu.
That's true, but if that's just going to be rejected by centrist, establishment Democrats and their supporters, then what's the point?  If we just go with a centrist, quasi-Republican agenda instead, what's the point?  What's the point of even calling ourselves Democrats/liberals/progressives if we're not going to support much in the way of reforms anymore?  Do we even have any core values left at that point?

Quote
But one Bernie in the White House this year is impotent without the necessary political infrastructure to enact the agenda.  We don’t need one Bernie in the White House now.  We need thousands on our school boards and city councils, as our county commissioners and judges, in our state houses an all over Congress, over the next several decades.
Right.  And you know how we get that?  We score a hell of a win and it galvanizes people to follow in Bernie's footsteps.  If Democrats can't back progressives, if progressive reforms go down in flames time and time again, what sort of message do you think is being sent to progressive people looking at running for office and changing things?

Quote
Taking back our country only starts with the election this fall.  Bernie’s supporters are the ideological shock troops the Democrats have needed for forty years, a counterbalance to the (Im)moral Majority and the teabaggers—except not evil.
Exactly.  And alienating the most fervent supporters of actual reform will only hurt the Democratic Party - not just in this election, but in future elections.  Status Quo Joe VS the unhinged mania of Trump.  That's a hell of a choice to present to voters!  If voters see this coming election as a battle of evil vs lesser evil, as they did with Clinton, as they likely will with Biden, we've already lost.  And I dunno about anyone else, but I am sick to death of seeing that Orange Turd on TV.  He needs to be gone yesterday and he needs to go up against a genuine populist who will tear his phony populism to shreds.  He doesn't need 4 more years to spew his bile and swamp DC with his cronies.  Appealing to "centrists" isn't worth that.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 06, 2020, 09:09:01 PM
On the basis of universal criticism, and litmus test politics, there is no politician you could ever vote for.  I had to reject this idea, in the time I was voting, or I would never have voted at all.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on March 07, 2020, 04:08:38 AM
Granted, Bernie has never been Veep, but he's been in politics for the last 40 years.  Longer than Obama.  Longer than Hillary.  Longer than most of the other candidates.  To get a more experienced candidate, you'd need to get a shovel.
You mean like Biden, who's been an elected official of one sort or another for the last 50 years?

Look.  If Sanders is the nominee, I will happily vote for Sanders in November.  But I have more reasons to be concerned about his health and his ability to get things done than I do about Biden's, and Biden has more executive experience than Sanders.

But ultimately, I don't really care either way as long as the Oval Orifice is defeated this November.  That's my number one priority, over everything else.  That cancer on the body politic needs to be excised, and whether by Biden or by Sanders I don't care.

However.

Being a champion of progressive reforms means fuck-all when you don't have a Congress that's willing to go along.  Yes we need nationalized health care and wealth taxes and all the other things, but do you know what's going to happen if they get proposed and defeated by a Congress that's not as progressive as the president?  We lose out on those things for another generation or so.

What we need to do first is build the progressive infrastructure so that we can get them done in the next 10-15 years, instead of suffering a defeat and losing out for 25-30 years.  One progressive President faced with a centrist (or worse, divided) Congress is going to accomplish nothing.

These are benefits to the country that I personally probably won't live to see.  I don't care.  I want my nieces to see them.  This is about the long-term survival of the country, not about a warning shot across the bow.

I want them actually done, not proposed and then defeated by a Congress more cowardly than the populace.  I don't want an impotent statement about hoping to do them.  This country has been dragged so far to the right over the last 40 years, we have got a lot of repair work and education to do before we can seriously expect to enact the kinds of programs and reforms that are needed.

I am a rationalist.  While I would like the luxury of voting my heart, I vote my brain.  We can either build a national progressive coalition and political infrastructure to make the changes permanent, or we can just engage in political wankery and have every advance we make reversed by the next Republican president.  I choose permanence, and I genuinely believe that permanence is best achieved by evolution rather than revolution.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 07, 2020, 10:20:47 AM
Oh, is it rationalist to irrationally hate someone, who you have never met?  This is a useful tool for leaders to use with their followers however.  Those weird French over there, they are terrible, fear them, hate them, let's make war on them!  When in fact, under different circumstances, one could meet Trump or Obama at a bar and share a beer (old meme).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 07, 2020, 04:56:57 PM
Three plus days until Bernie and Joe both wrestle naked in chocolate pudding while both claiming the African-American vote! ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 07, 2020, 06:39:51 PM
You mean like Biden, who's been an elected official of one sort or another for the last 50 years?
Apologies, I apparently forgot to add a progressive qualifier to candidate.  (Clearly, I know Sanders isn't the most experienced, since I said that he had more experience than most other candidates)

My intent was to convey that we're never going to get a more experienced progressive candidate, so if he's not experienced enough, nothing's going to be good enough.

Quote
Look.  If Sanders is the nominee, I will happily vote for Sanders in November.
Good.  All the more reason to go with Sanders.  Sanders can appeal to people who might not otherwise vote Democrat and those are the people we'll need to be successful.  If we run a candidate who mostly appeals to centrist Boomer Dems (particularly Redstate boomers, no less), we're effectively shooting ourselves in the foot.

Quote
  But I have more reasons to be concerned about his health and his ability to get things done than I do about Biden's
Do you, though?  Sanders had a heart problem and that got treated.  Biden pretty clearly has a cognitive dysfunction.  It's mystifying to me that after all the concern trolling with Sanders and the years of saying that Trump has lost his marbles, to turn around and give Biden a pass on his health.

And if you mean getting things done by proposing a tepid incrementalist not-really-a-solution to some pretty damn dire problems, then kodos for not fixing much.  Or rather, kudos for aspiring to not fix much.  What an inspiring policy vision!  It's gonna be damn hard to turn out the base with that.

Quote
, and Biden has more executive experience than Sanders.
Well, that's true.

Quote
But ultimately, I don't really care either way as long as the Oval Orifice is defeated this November.  That's my number one priority, over everything else.  That cancer on the body politic needs to be excised, and whether by Biden or by Sanders I don't care.
Now that I fully agree with.  Obviously, we differ greatly on who's capable of doing it.

A lot of this stuff is subjective, but we do know one thing as a fact: Trump has defeated a centrist Democrat before.  Whether that can be generalized is up in the air, and Trump in 2020 is a very different beast than Trump in 2016.  The public is a lot less sympathetic to him, but at the same time, he still has a huge cult following and he's a much more experienced, dangerous adversary complete with known foreign "assistance".  It's going to be a hell of a fight either way, and we desperately need to bring our A game.  And in head-to-head matchups, Bernie tops the charts.  That's another fact.

Quote
Being a champion of progressive reforms means fuck-all when you don't have a Congress that's willing to go along.  Yes we need nationalized health care and wealth taxes and all the other things, but do you know what's going to happen if they get proposed and defeated by a Congress that's not as progressive as the president?  We lose out on those things for another generation or so.
And we lose out on those things 100% of the time if we DON'T pursue them.  With Sanders, we at least know that stuff is on the agenda and that he's going to fight for them because that's what he believes in.  With Biden, we don't know that.  Any of that.

Quote
What we need to do first is build the progressive infrastructure so that we can get them done in the next 10-15 years, instead of suffering a defeat and losing out for 25-30 years.
I'd love to hear how we're supposed to build a progressive infrastructure while simultaneously not giving progressive candidates the time of day and never advancing progressive legislation.

Quote
These are benefits to the country that I personally probably won't live to see.  I don't care.  I want my nieces to see them.  This is about the long-term survival of the country, not about a warning shot across the bow.
Good.  Me, too.

Quote
I want them actually done, not proposed and then defeated by a Congress more cowardly than the populace.  I don't want an impotent statement about hoping to do them.
You don't know that.

Quote
This country has been dragged so far to the right over the last 40 years, we have got a lot of repair work and education to do before we can seriously expect to enact the kinds of programs and reforms that are needed.
And how did it get dragged to the right?  One villainous virtue I admit I like in Republicans is that they're not afraid vote their values.  The result: their nominees actually reflect the base.  And then when their guy wins - someone who the talking heads say is far too extreme to win - when he wins, that sweeps a lot of like-minded people into office and they can actually put forth an agenda that suits them.  We can't.  We have to placate so many factions and our position starts so watered down, that it's like storming in the boss's office and asking nicely for a two-cent raise then getting haggled down to washing his car every Saturday for a nickel that he drops in the bucket.  That's how well incrementalism has been working for us so far.

Well, I refuse to accept yet another defeat.  So, before it's too late (though it probably is already to late), I am pleading with people to not vote for the "safe" candidate and instead vote their goddamn values like they should have from the very start.

Quote
I choose permanence, and I genuinely believe that permanence is best achieved by evolution rather than revolution.
Yeah, well, good luck with that.  I guess we'll find out for sure and then we can revisit this discussion in the fullness of time.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on March 07, 2020, 06:53:37 PM
One little nitpick...

Quote
The public is a lot less sympathetic to him [Trump]...

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

His approval ratings have actually been on an upward trajectory for awhile now, while his disaporval has dropped as well.

Which to me further states that we cant just repeat 2016 and hope it will end differently, since he is on a positive trajectory. If it didn't work the first time, and people are starting to like him even more, why would it work this time?

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 07, 2020, 07:09:29 PM
Good point.

(https://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/xbadryh5bushiscaznlw4a.png)

It has somewhat gone up, though it does tend to bottom out from time to time.  Government shutdown, saying that a judge wouldn't try his case impartially because he's mexican, putting kids in cages, that time he almost started WWIII, firing disease outbreak experts not long before a disease outbreak, etc.

But a Democratic candidate says "Yeah!" in a weird way and it's GG for him.  What a time to be alive.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on March 07, 2020, 07:16:24 PM
My apologies for daring to have a nuanced take on modern American politics, and goals beyond the aspirations of one politician.  And I defy you to assert that a Biden presidency would be the bigoted, moronic kleptocracy currently in operation.  You cannot with any legitimacy say that it would be the same or worse; it may not be what you think is the best, but it would be better.

I just want to ask one question: if the Democratic nominee is Biden rather than Sanders, is getting rid of Trump important enough to you that you'll go out and vote anyway?  If yes, fine, we simply have a difference of opinion on how best to move the nation forward and I'll be happy to debate the matter further if you can back down from your hyperbolic tone.

If no, then we have nothing further to discuss.

Oh, and where that progressive infrastructure's going to come from?  Do what I'm doing: I quite like our current Congresswoman.  I have no objection to her continuing to be my Congresswoman.  She's being primaried from the left this year even though she's already quite progressive... and I'm voting for her challenger because of that.

*sigh*  This is why Bernie supporters have such a bad reputation.  It's such a cult of personality, and it's like arguing with a creationist.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on March 07, 2020, 07:23:28 PM
It has somewhat gone up, though it does tend to bottom out from time to time.  Government shutdown, saying that a judge wouldn't try his case impartially because he's mexican, putting kids in cages, that time he almost started WWIII, firing disease outbreak experts not long before a disease outbreak, etc.

But a Democratic candidate says "Yeah!" in a weird way and it's GG for him.  What a time to be alive.
I still can't wrap my brain around how mocking a disable reporter didn't get him blown out of the race.  No other candidate could have survived that -- but then, no other candidate was a media-backed ratings-guaranteed cash cow of a shitshow (https://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/02/les-moonves-trump-cbs-220001).  If the Oval Orifice had been held to the same standards as every other candidate, he wouldn't have made it to Iowa.  Instead, it was all "Ha ha, wow, can you believe he said that?  Anyway, about Hillary's emails..."
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: PopeyesPappy on March 07, 2020, 07:34:32 PM
Well, I refuse to accept yet another defeat.  So, before it's too late (though it probably is already to late), I am pleading with people to not vote for the "safe" candidate and instead vote their goddamn values like they should have from the very start.
Yeah, well, good luck with that.  I guess we'll find out for sure and then we can revisit this discussion in the fullness of time.

You're fucked then. Conservatives and moderates together outnumber liberals 7 to 3.

(https://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/aiqf7sws106tfrpmwupr5g.png)

A liberal presidential candidate is going to have to pull more than 65% of the moderate vote to beat the conservative opposition, and the further to the left a liberal gets the harder it is going to be to get those moderate votes. 
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 07, 2020, 07:36:46 PM
My apologies for daring to have a nuanced take on modern American politics, and goals beyond the aspirations of one politician.
You do know my whole thing is to reinvigorate the Democrats with actually leftist policy goals and save it from its emerging status as a status quo party?  Suffice it to say that this is a LOT bigger than just Bernie.

Quote
And I defy you to assert that a Biden presidency would be the bigoted, moronic kleptocracy currently in operation.  You cannot with any legitimacy say that it would be the same or worse; it may not be what you think is the best, but it would be better.
Yes.  A dwarf pony with a penchant for arson would be a better president.  Your point?

Quote
I just want to ask one question: if the Democratic nominee is Biden rather than Sanders, is getting rid of Trump important enough to you that you'll go out and vote anyway?  If yes, fine, we simply have a difference of opinion on how best to move the nation forward and I'll be happy to debate the matter further if you can back down from your hyperbolic tone.
*noticeable hesitation* Yes.

If Biden keeps it together and the VP pick isn't godawful.  If it's Bloomberg, I'm going to jump out of this Party like my pants are on fire and re-register as an independent.

Quote
Oh, and where that progressive infrastructure's going to come from?  Do what I'm doing: I quite like our current Congresswoman.  I have no objection to her continuing to be my Congresswoman.  She's being primaried from the left this year even though she's already quite progressive... and I'm voting for her challenger because of that.
I voted for a Progressive in the local races as well. 

Quote
*sigh*  This is why Bernie supporters have such a bad reputation.  It's such a cult of personality, and it's like arguing with a creationist.
Oh jeez, what'd I do this time?  I'm sorry that I like my candidate, I guess?

You know, this whole time, I've been talking about the big policy ideas and trying to talk as little as possible about the man himself just to avoid that sort of erroneous stereotyping.  These are powerful, nation-changing policy changes and lives hang in the balance.  But if you want to talk about how he's a socialist with wacky hair (and did you know he had a heart problem?  I haven't mentioned it in the last 5 minutes, thought I'd bring it up again) that's certainly your prerogative.  A tragically short-sighted prerogative.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 07, 2020, 07:52:42 PM
You're fucked then. Conservatives and moderates together outnumber liberals 7 to 3.

A liberal presidential candidate is going to have to pull more than 65% of the moderate vote to beat the conservative opposition, and the further to the left a liberal gets the harder it is going to be to get those moderate votes.
Take a look at head-to-head polls (and/or generic ballots) and get back to me.

And predictably, your implication that Sanders' popularity extends only to super liberal (where do you guys keep getting this shared talking point?  I'd love to know) is dead wrong.

Quote
At the same time, Sanders was formidable in his core groups. He won voters younger than 30 by a smashing 58-13% over Biden and those age 30 to 44 by 44-20%. “Very” liberal voters backed him by 47-18%, independents by 38-24%. On one of his signature issues, he won voters who support a government-run, single-payer health care system – 56% of all those who voted – by 43-22% over Biden.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/late-support-lifts-biden-sanders-base-takeaways-super/story?id=69381829

Independents voting for guy who was himself an Independent for a long while.  Go figure.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on March 07, 2020, 07:55:40 PM
Oh jeez, what'd I do this time?  I'm sorry that I like my candidate, I guess?
No, it's that you can't do it without being rude towards someone who has a perfectly legitimate difference of opinion.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on March 07, 2020, 07:57:50 PM
Take a look at head-to-head polls (and/or generic ballots) and get back to me.
I have looked at the head-to-head polls.  Statistically there's no difference between Biden's lead over Trump, and Sanders' lead over Trump.  Either one is in a position to beat him, and neither one has a statistically significant advantage over the other.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 07, 2020, 08:02:08 PM
No, it's that you can't do it without being rude towards someone who has a perfectly legitimate difference of opinion.
And here I was thinking that I was just voicing my perfectly legitimate difference of opinion, the same as you.  How come that is okay for you to do, and not for me?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 07, 2020, 08:06:42 PM
I have looked at the head-to-head polls.  Statistically there's no difference between Biden's lead over Trump, and Sanders' lead over Trump.  Either one is in a position to beat him, and neither one has a statistically significant advantage over the other.
That's true.  Actually, I think Biden might have jumped up a little in recent days.  YoGov had Biden 50-43 with Sanders at 48-45.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 07, 2020, 08:45:04 PM
If the priority is to defeat Trump then whether Biden or Sanders is the best candidate is a legitimate conversation. If the priority is to elect a president with progressive values then Sanders is the obvious choice. Frankly, I don't put much faith in polls when public opinion is changing so quickly. I don't know which one has the better chance of defeating Trump.

I've inquired with family, friends and coworkers and yet to talk to anyone supporting Sanders. This has really surprised me because I know some pretty liberal people but also these people are all over 30. Everyone says they will vote for Sanders if he is the Democratic candidate. My husband and his conservative friends absolutely hate Sanders but that is no surprise. I currently feel like I don't really understand where things are going.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on March 07, 2020, 08:50:50 PM
And here I was thinking that I was just voicing my perfectly legitimate difference of opinion, the same as you.  How come that is okay for you to do, and not for me?
No, you were misrepresenting my statements.  You will note that, unlike your statement "But if you want to talk about how he's a socialist with wacky hair (and did you know he had a heart problem?  I haven't mentioned it in the last 5 minutes, thought I'd bring it up again)", I never once said that Sanders can't be elected, or that he's too liberal to be elected.  I mentioned his health precisely once.  So no, you aren't voicing your opinion, you're attacking things I did not say and did not assert.  You haven't mentioned policies once.  So don't play this bullshit word game with me.

If you have anything of substance to say, I'll be interested to hear it.  So far, I have been disappointed, and have low expectations going forward.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 07, 2020, 08:55:40 PM
On polls ... worked for Hillary (they are echo chambers, like Twitter, but with more math to finagle the results with).

On one-dimensional analysis of voters (conservative vs liberal) ... obviously simple minded ... and based on polls.  Even if polls were 100% accurate, a one-dimensional analysis is how the political-wonks perform magic tricks for fools who pay real money for their analysis.  There are approximately 330 million different American opinions on anything.  How that can be successfully aggregated in a political campaign (yes, non-voters influence voters, so they vote indirectly) is part of the art, not science, of political campaigns.  Which are essentially popularity contests over people that we really don't know anything real about.  IQ people constantly get things wrong, that EQ people understand intuitively.  This is why women are right all the time, and men are wrong all the time ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 07, 2020, 09:11:42 PM
No, you were misrepresenting my statements.  You will note that, unlike your statement "But if you want to talk about how he's a socialist with wacky hair (and did you know he had a heart problem?  I haven't mentioned it in the last 5 minutes, thought I'd bring it up again)", I never once said that Sanders can't be elected, or that he's too liberal to be elected.  I mentioned his health precisely once.  So no, you aren't voicing your opinion, you're attacking things I did not say and did not assert.
That's true.  Well, partially true.  I wasn't complaining about you specifically, just the common centrist line of attack.  It does get a bit grating, though I'd imagine it's also grating to hear about it.  My bad.

Though this was after you accused me of being rude, so it's a bit strange to claim that as a cause of the initial offense.

Quote
You haven't mentioned policies once.  So don't play this bullshit word game with me.
Oh?  I haven't mentioned medicare for all?  That's a pretty glaring false accusation.  I thought much better of you than that.

And since you brought it up, I've noticed that your case for Biden can mostly be summarized in three points:  1) he can beat Trump 2) Biden has more experience 3) an incrementalist approach will work

Is that a fair assessment?

Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but I think it is actually you who hasn't mentioned policy.  What exactly do you favor policywise with Biden over Sanders?

Quote
If you have anything of substance to say, I'll be interested to hear it.  So far, I have been disappointed, and have low expectations going forward.
Yeah, I'd love a couple answers.  Let's say Biden gets the nomination.  How do you plan to garner enthusiasm for Biden?  How do you plan to reach out to non-Biden Democrats or to independents or conservatives?  (Heads up, calling us cultists typically doesn't go over well)  How do you plan to actually take down Trump - who as Shiranu pointed out, still has a steadfastly loyal following?  And finally, how does a Biden win actually translate into progressive victory?  That last one is something you could have possibly won me over with, had you taken that opportunity instead of telling me to watch my tone and telling me that Biden would be a better president than a guy I consider the worst president in human history as if I were so oblivious that I didn't already know that.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 07, 2020, 09:16:15 PM
Appropriate dance for Sanders supporters if he gets to be POTUS ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXpnuyqloKU

Ricky Ricardo says, Si.

Here is the appropriate dance for Biden supporters if he gets to be POTUS ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3aeMrwxe88

The credit card lobby says, charge it!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 07, 2020, 09:50:02 PM
Appropriate dance for Sanders supporters if he gets to be POTUS ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXpnuyqloKU

Ricky Ricardo says, Si.

My husband and his family immigrated from Cuba and Sander's comments regarding Fidel Castro were a HUGE fail. It came off as a "Hitler made the trains run on time" comment.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on March 07, 2020, 10:27:00 PM
Quote
My husband and his family immigrated from Cuba and Sander's comments regarding Fidel Castro were a HUGE fail. It came off as a "Hitler made the trains run on time" comment.

I mean... it's not like he just randomly made that comment. He didn't just randomly praise Castro.

The hosts continued to pressure him on, "Are you SURE you're not a communist like Castro? Like... sure, sure? Cause we think you are a communist like Castro!" and he finally just said, "Okay, yes he did some things I actually agree with... that doesn't somehow mean that the other 99% of shit he did wasn't horrible."

Imagine ANY other candidate being held to that standard... of being called out for supporting capitalism even though there are horrible capitalists, supporting the military even though they commit war crimes, etc. ...it would be ridiculous. But they got the soundbyte they wanted and left out the context or the full point.

Imagine if someone continued to harass you about, "Are you SURE your not in favour of slave labour? After all the slave traders were just capitalists, and you like capitalism, so you probably like slave labour right? I mean capitalism is pretty bad, because slave labour happens you know?"... if you pointed out that capitalism does things right does that somehow mean you are also showing an unspoken support for slave labour?

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on March 07, 2020, 11:42:40 PM
And since you brought it up, I've noticed that your case for Biden can mostly be summarized in three points:  1) he can beat Trump 2) Biden has more experience 3) an incrementalist approach will work

Is that a fair assessment?
Yes, that's reasonably accurate.  Right now my priority is executive experience, to clean up the shitstorm domestically and internationally that Trump is going to leave behind.  I believe that is more important right now -- we are damaged goods internationally, and catastrophically divided nationally.

And it's not so much that I think an incremental approach is the best approach; it's that in this election it's the only realistic way forward.  We're only going to get a center-left Congress at best and flipping the Senate is iffy at best, so I will take the small steps we can realistically do.

If (big if, but not impossible) after the primaries are over, there are a bunch of centrists knocked off by progressives, that calculation will change radically, but that doesn't look like it's on the cards right now.  It's likely that our local progressive challenger Morgan Harper (https://ballotpedia.org/Morgan_Harper) is going to be crushed by our local nearly-as-progressive incumbent Joyce Beatty (https://beattyforcongress.com) in the primary -- and I'm lucky in that regard, especially since winning the Democratic primary is virtually a lock on winning the election in this district -- but I will vote for the challenger because that's the path forward, so far as building the progressive infrastructure goes.  I need local progressives to know that the votes are out there to be had, and local incumbents to know that there is support for moving leftwards.

And hey, if Biden (or Sanders) picks Congresswoman Beatty as his VP (which would be a brilliant choice, putting Ohio fully into play and providing ethnic and gender balance -- and she would absolutely eviscerate Ayatollah Pence in the VP debate), Harper is pre-positioned to take over the seat in the ensuing special election.

Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but I think it is actually you who hasn't mentioned policy.
No, you're not mistaken, I haven't mentioned policy.  For me, this isn't a policy election.  Outside of Williamson and Bloomberg and to some extent Gabbard, I would have been happy with any of the Democratic candidates getting the nomination.  There is one goal and one goal only, and that's getting that lying bigoted sack of shit out of our White House.  And the thing that causes me to tick Biden over Sanders is Executive Branch experience.  It is my view that that is what we're going to need most, to right the ship of state nationally and internationally.

What's going to change my perspective on the matter will be the facts on the ground.  If a bunch of centrists get knocked off by progressives throughout the primary season, then maybe we can have revolution rather than evolution and I will cheerily admit my miscalculation.

Until then, my view is that we have two good candidates, and one has the executive experience the other doesn't.  It really is as simple as that.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 08, 2020, 12:03:04 AM
I mean... it's not like he just randomly made that comment. He didn't just randomly praise Castro.

The hosts continued to pressure him on, "Are you SURE you're not a communist like Castro? Like... sure, sure? Cause we think you are a communist like Castro!" and he finally just said, "Okay, yes he did some things I actually agree with... that doesn't somehow mean that the other 99% of shit he did wasn't horrible."

Imagine ANY other candidate being held to that standard... of being called out for supporting capitalism even though there are horrible capitalists, supporting the military even though they commit war crimes, etc. ...it would be ridiculous. But they got the soundbyte they wanted and left out the context or the full point.

Imagine if someone continued to harass you about, "Are you SURE your not in favour of slave labour? After all the slave traders were just capitalists, and you like capitalism, so you probably like slave labour right? I mean capitalism is pretty bad, because slave labour happens you know?"... if you pointed out that capitalism does things right does that somehow mean you are also showing an unspoken support for slave labour?

The problem isn't that Castro got some things right, but it is a self-fail to mention that during a political campaign outside of Cuba.  The usual SJW response is that people shouldn't behave like people have always behaved before .... because Rousseau has "woke" us up.  Idealists always support humanity we don't have, and hate the humanity we actually are.  Idealists oppose empirical evidence.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on March 08, 2020, 09:11:39 AM
Voting strategically in the primary for who has the best chance of  winning sounds dicey for me and fraught with a lot of second guessing.  We know that Hillary didn't win, and for the life of me, I don't see how Biden is any different.  They are both cut from the same cloth, and with the scissors in the hands of the inner circle.  I'm not saying Sanders would have won if he were nominated last time.  I'm just going to vote for who I want.  Voting for the guy I don't want seems fundamentally wrong. 

Also, over the last 20 years I've watched the Democratic Party drift to the right.  I believe this was a strategy, and someone in this forum years ago thought drifting to the right to push the conservatives off a cliff was brilliant.  I don't think it's brilliant, and I think that's partly why the Democratic Party is failing.  There's something important about reflecting the desires of constituents, something that Republicans are much better at than Democrats.

This is conjecture of course.  I don't understand voters or what motivates them.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 08, 2020, 10:31:11 AM
McGovern campaign 1972?  The Dems should have cut to the chase while Fidel Castro was still alive ... just nominate Fidel and we will all get Spanish literacy (which is not a bad thing BTW) and free medical care, Third World style.

Yes, the CIA took over the Democrat party decades ago.  Averell Harriman helped found the OSS/CIA, and was a Democratic Party bigwig.  In later life, married to Pamela Digby Churchill, who was Winston's first daughter in law, and played Mata Hari for him, in counter-intelligence against British and US senior officers.  Later Averell and Pamela got married (1971) and went around "cultivating" young Democrat candidates (including the Clintons).  President Clinton made Pamela US ambassador to France, as a personal favor.  She died in that office, and uniquely was brought back to the US in Air Force One.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._Averell_Harriman

Yes, the Dems (who bombed Vietnam into the Stone Age) are ever so Liberal .... bwahaha.  The American Left has been played, for 100 years now, ever since J Edgar headed the FBI etc.

Yes, not only is revisionist history fraught with error (could Sanders win in 2016), so is predicting the future (of current election).

The voters don't understand themselves or what motivates them.  The mob never does.  Hence Socrates' objections to brainless democracy (mob rule).  Hive minds aren't real.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: PopeyesPappy on March 08, 2020, 12:57:41 PM
Take a look at head-to-head polls (and/or generic ballots) and get back to me.

And predictably, your implication that Sanders' popularity extends only to super liberal (where do you guys keep getting this shared talking point?  I'd love to know) is dead wrong.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/late-support-lifts-biden-sanders-base-takeaways-super/story?id=69381829

Independents voting for guy who was himself an Independent for a long while.  Go figure.

If we learned anything in 2016 it was polls are unreliable. At this point in 2016 no one was giving Trump a snowball's chance in hell, and Clinton led him in the polls right up through election day. We were also reminded yet again that slim majorities in the general election don't always equate to a win.

As far as talking points go I don't know where you got that one because that isn't what I said. I said he had to capture the moderate vote, and the first sentence in the ABC article you linked was, "A surge of late support lifted former Vice President Joe Biden on Super Tuesday, extending his candidacy beyond his southern strongholds as moderates coalesced behind his electability argument." 

Moderate ≠ independent.

(https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/drutman-middle-1a.png?w=575)

Ideologically moderates are all over the map. The same goes for independents but to a lesser degree. There are left-leaning moderates and independents. There are right-leaning moderates and independents. Moderates by definition however generally do not fall into the extreme of either the left or the right on most issues. They tend to be more centristic. While a majority of independents identify as moderates, more of them lean further left than among moderates. So no, it isn't surprising that independents like far-left candidates, and moderates like centrist candidates. That's why Biden is getting more votes than Sanders. There are more moderates than independents.

The good news is the majority of both groups lean left. The bad news is the democrats half to have about 2/3rds of the moderate vote to win, and like it or not the further to the left a candidate gets the less likely they are to get there.

The bottom line here is asking a moderate to vote for someone on the far end of either spectrum is asking them to vote against their values. When forced to choose between two extremes they will often make a decision based on a single issue. For a small business owner that issue might be tax-friendly corporate laws. For a Catholic that issue could be abortion. They might even decide to vote 3rd party, or just stay home. Neither of those last two would benefit the democratic nominee who say they need a large turn out to beat trump.

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on March 08, 2020, 03:19:38 PM
Your Venn Diagram needs another circle for "extremists who think they are moderates."
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 08, 2020, 05:32:45 PM
Your Venn Diagram needs another circle for "extremists who think they are moderates."

And moderates who think they are extremists etc.

Known knowns, known unknowns, unknown knowns, unknown unknowns - Donald Rumsfeld.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 08, 2020, 05:33:33 PM
"Confused Biden Calls Himself "Obiden Bama" & Says "We Can Only Re-Elect Donald Trump"" ... sorry, Dem's own goal strikes again.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 08, 2020, 06:36:49 PM
If we learned anything in 2016 it was polls are unreliable.
...to a point.  538 had Trump with a 30% chance of victory.  Sometimes, you roll a 1.  It happens.

Quote
I said he had to capture the moderate vote, and the first sentence in the ABC article you linked was, "A surge of late support lifted former Vice President Joe Biden on Super Tuesday, extending his candidacy beyond his southern strongholds as moderates coalesced behind his electability argument."
Moderate democrats was clearly what that article is referring to, not self-described "moderates" writ large.  These sorts of terms can be a bit subjective and confusing and overly complicated, so I'll boil it down for clarity's sake:

Sanders can get more non-Democrat votes than Biden.

"Some 26% of Democrats and independents polled Feb. 17-25 said they believed Sanders was the strongest Democrat in a head-to-head matchup with Trump, compared with 20% who picked billionaire businessman Michael Bloomberg and 17% who named former Vice President Joe Biden.

That was a big change from a month earlier, when 27% of respondents gave Biden the edge, and just 17% thought Sanders could beat Trump."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-democrats-poll/sanders-surpasses-biden-among-african-american-voters-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN20J2J9

Quote
The bottom line here is asking a moderate to vote for someone on the far end of either spectrum is asking them to vote against their values.
As I have learned quite recently, it should not be taken as a given that people are going to vote their values.

Case in point: Trump.  That's a person who I think most of us would characterize as solidly right-wing, who obviously did manage to get support from more than just diehard right-wingers.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on March 08, 2020, 06:55:09 PM
I don't see Biden drawing in the independent vote; he is more of the same, boring and frankly seems like a semi-senile grandpa wandered on stage and is just recounting the glory days.

Bernie at least can draw in a segment of the independent vote, and frankly... most democrats are going to vote for the nominee regardless of who it is. I don't think Bernie getting the nomination is going to suddenly cause large swaths of the Dem to say, "You know what? Fuck it, I'm gonna stay home and not vote."

Biden appeals to dyed in the wool Democrats and the "Not Trump" crowd, and honestly that seems to be about it. That is what they tried with Hillary and it failed.

And I appreciate that people can afford to take what they feel are "incremental steps" in voting a candidate like Biden in, even though it would only be an incremental step back to the status quo and not legitimate reform... I cant afford that. A majority of Americans cant afford that. I'm living paycheck to paycheck while up to my neck in debt, and it's not even debt on fun shit. It's debt on medical bills, on a college education that is frankly useless (like 90% or more of college degrees), on rising food and housing prices.

This country needs a progressive revolution, or it will very soon likely require a violent one and I sure as fuck don't want that. But the working class continues to be driven further and further into poverty, the wealth divide deepens, the sick have to stay home and lose their job or die because they cant get the medical treatment they need... and more of the same is going to mean more of this.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 08, 2020, 07:07:29 PM
Yes, that's reasonably accurate.  Right now my priority is executive experience, to clean up the shitstorm domestically and internationally that Trump is going to leave behind.  I believe that is more important right now -- we are damaged goods internationally, and catastrophically divided nationally.
I think we all agree that this dumpster-fire needs to be cleaned up asap, though we're definitely at odds over how to do that.

Quote
And it's not so much that I think an incremental approach is the best approach; it's that in this election it's the only realistic way forward.  We're only going to get a center-left Congress at best and flipping the Senate is iffy at best, so I will take the small steps we can realistically do.
See, I would've agreed with that 10-20 years ago, but look, we have some pretty damn serious problems on our hands and we simply can't take half-measures or less.  Climate change can't wait.  Medicare for all can't wait.  I can't stress enough how serious this stuff is.  We don't have the luxury of doing politics as normal.  Plus, every time the POTUS swaps parties, it's a 1 step forward, 10 steps back situation.  We have to massively up our game and fervently fight for the stuff we say we believe in.  It's as simple as that.  We need firebrands for this fight, not incrementalists.  After the wreckage is cleared and we're on a decent track again, then we can talk about how fast we want to get there, not before.

Quote
No, you're not mistaken, I haven't mentioned policy.  For me, this isn't a policy election.
Okay, and hear me out on this, but for me, the entire point of doing politics is to make policy.  For me, it's ALWAYS about policy.  Cause I'll level with you - I'm not out there knocking on doors, sending texts, sending emails - to get a person elected.  Believe it or not, I'm not a cult of personality kind of guy.  I'm out there to effect policy change.

So saying something like that, it's just flabbergasting.

And I promised myself that I'd go canvassing for whomever the Dems nominate against Trump, so for IPU's sake, PLEASE give me policy reasons to sell this guy to people.  I'm begging you.

I have family members who are Independent-minded and one who straight up told me that Biden and Trump are a giant douche and turd sandwich kind of situation (which, btw, I consider a false equivalence) and I simply can't come to him with a lesser of two evils argument.  It's just totally unconvincing.

Quote
If a bunch of centrists get knocked off by progressives throughout the primary season, then maybe we can have revolution rather than evolution and I will cheerily admit my miscalculation.
See, that might never happen because people who say they're ideologically aligned with the progressive candidate might not vote that way and the establishment is going to find a way to make sure the centrist wins (like say, slipping the centrist candidate the debate questions ahead of time or making some phone calls and have almost everyone else drop out of the race and simultaneously endorse the chosen centrist scant days before a big vote)

Quote
Until then, my view is that we have two good candidates, and one has the executive experience the other doesn't.  It really is as simple as that.
And I get that that's important to you, but I gotta be honest with you, that's probably not going to convince other people.  I mean FFS, last time America voted in a guy with zero political experience whatsoever.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 08, 2020, 07:19:48 PM
I don't see Biden drawing in the independent vote; he is more of the same, boring and frankly seems like a semi-senile grandpa wandered on stage and is just recounting the glory days.
And they say that I'm the mean one!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 08, 2020, 09:06:00 PM
I agree that Medicare for All is the best solution for providing healthcare but a plan that is more agreeable to Republicans and special interests may save more lives than holding out for Medicare for All. Let's say Sanders is elected, champions Medicare for All, encounters strong resistance but gets it passed at the end of his second term. That is eight years with approximately 29 million people not having access to affordable healthcare. Let's say Biden is elected and champions "Medicare for All Who Want It" that covers people who don't have private insurance, which is passed in four years rather than eight because it doesn't encounter such strong resistance. That is 29 million people who have affordable healthcare four years earlier, which is significant. I feel like Sanders won't accept a compromise because he knows M4A won't be financially viable without eliminating private insurance, just as the ACA compromise failed because states were allowed to opt-out of expanding Medicaid and citizens were allowed to refuse coverage.

The good thing about Sanders is M4A is his signature policy and I'm confident he will make healthcare a priority. I'm not sure how strongly Biden would fight for universal coverage. After winning the executive branch and convincing the legislative branch we then must deal with the judicial branch, which Trump has stacked, claiming universal healthcare is unconstitutional.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 08, 2020, 09:44:49 PM
The world needs a revolution.  It isn't good enough for spoiled Boomers, X-gen, Millennials ... enter Corona-Chan.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 08, 2020, 11:01:46 PM
Bloomberg drops out, endorses Biden in bid to stop Sanders from achieving 'insurmountable' delegate lead
Bloomberg would owe least with Biden's tax plan, most with Sanders' tax plan (https://www.businessinsider.com/mike-bloomberg-taxes-under-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-wealth-tax-2020-3)

Interesting.  Really puts the "wasted" $500 million presidential bid in perspective.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 09, 2020, 08:45:29 AM
Bloomberg drops out, endorses Biden in bid to stop Sanders from achieving 'insurmountable' delegate lead
Bloomberg would owe least with Biden's tax plan, most with Sanders' tax plan (https://www.businessinsider.com/mike-bloomberg-taxes-under-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-wealth-tax-2020-3)

Interesting.  Really puts the "wasted" $500 million presidential bid in perspective.

The lack of self-interest by billionaires is legendary ... LEGENDARY!  Like the Lock Ness monster.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on March 09, 2020, 11:25:17 AM
And they say that I'm the mean one!

Yeah, I found that a bit funny as well :P.

Funny enough, I don't really have much of a problem with Biden either, he seems like a nice enough guy. But that's how I see him on the stage and I'm not going to sugar coat it.

Imagine Biden vs Trump in debates... Biden is going to get absolutely massacred. It won't matter if Trump is right, it will just matter that he is able to bully and twist Biden's constant foot-in-mouth remarks and just...weird... remarks into clips that will be played on every major news network ad nauseam.

I don't know how much better Bernie would fare, but if you watch interviews and debates with him... he has a sly sense of humour and knows how to smart off, which the media will (hopefully) eat up, assuming they aren't just trying to get Trump reelected as well.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 09, 2020, 11:52:38 AM
MSM is a Nazi conspiracy ;-)  Sure ... they are to the Right of Lenin.

Kamala Harris has endorsed Biden (to get on VP short list) ... now all the Jamaica-father/India-mother pseudo-African-Americans (you hear me Obama?) can vote for Creepy Joe ... bwahaha.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on March 09, 2020, 01:49:42 PM
Bernie may eat Biden for lunch in a debate, but it won't matter, since the DNC has decided to fear the the progressive candidate, thinking Biden can beat Trump. I don't think he can, though.

But then, I'm a pessimist.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 09, 2020, 04:44:27 PM
Bernie may eat Biden for lunch in a debate, but it won't matter, since the DNC has decided to fear the the progressive candidate, thinking Biden can beat Trump. I don't think he can, though.

But then, I'm a pessimist.

Bernie already signaled he will fold like used TP, just like in 2016.  The only question is "price".  He is not a real communist (obviously), just a crisis actor.

PS - Same as Corbyn in the UK, who also is a millionaire.  Carlos Maza of on-line fame, claims to be oppressed, but his mother is worth 11 billion dollars.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 09, 2020, 10:16:37 PM
Current polls for primaries tomorrow ...

Biden takes every state, except for Maryland.  Biden was behind on available ad money, but has been made good, by ...

PS - Sanders may also take N Dakota.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 10, 2020, 02:15:30 AM
I don't know how much better Bernie would fare, but if you watch interviews and debates with him... he has a sly sense of humour and knows how to smart off, which the media will (hopefully) eat up, assuming they aren't just trying to get Trump reelected as well.
I wouldn't put it past them.  The media does seem to serve as a bit of an enabling influence.  They've had a habit of reading Trump tweets verbatim and unknowingly (or perhaps knowing) amplifying the message.  They also have a habit of treating right-wing extremism as "normal" and its left-wing criticism (particularly from Sanders) as "radical" and "divisive".  The framing certainly skews to the right, and you'd think conservatives would be happy with that, but they love bashing the media as not sympathetic enough, and so we get this "fair and balanced" bullshit masquerading as reality.  For example:  Trump is "bold" and "true to his convictions" when he sticks to his guns.  When Sanders does it, he's "uncompromising".  It's sickening.  I don't think most Americans and certainly most Democrats are aware of how this skewed framing affects how they process news.

Particularly egregious is the "pie in the sky" portrayal of medicare-for-all, which conveniently ignores the fact that every other developed Western nation has some form of universal healthcare.  In any sane world, the media would note that America's healthcare policy is the aberration, not the other way around.  Same with the prison system.  Same with military aggression.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 10, 2020, 02:26:24 AM
Speak of the devil:  https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/03/09/boosting-electability-argument-sanders-has-won-independent-voters-13-out-16-exit

Quote
According to CNN, Sanders has won independents in 13 out of 16 states where exit polls are conducted, including Minnesota and North Carolina, which are expected to be competitive in the general election.

"Weird that this hasn't been mentioned by anyone on cable TV in the 24-7 coverage of 'electability,'" Sirota wrote.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 10, 2020, 03:48:26 AM
While Democrats debate about the best way to expand healthcare coverage, Trump wants to cut Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

https://youtu.be/m8LDRdUTYaI
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 10, 2020, 11:50:05 AM
Andrew Mellon, Sec of Treasury 1929 ... liquidate everything!  Particularly the Proletariat!

If the government becomes ungovernable because of the pandemic, will you blame Trump for being in office, or Hillary, the supporter of Goldman-Sachs, having failed to get elected in 2016?  Can the current financial crash be a Wall Street attempt to destroy Trump, to help Hillary get in as Biden's VP?  J P Morgan and Goldman-Sachs are making a literal killing, over the current volatility and "put" on financial instruments.

It may be necessary to fold the whole Federal Government, except for the military, which has to be paid to maintain martial law.  Either that, or stop panicking over TP and prisoner-made hand sanitizer.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 10, 2020, 11:57:26 AM
"Leftist Protester Displays "Sweden Must Die" Sign At International Women's Day March" .. like I have said, Leftists are self destructive psychopaths, who when politically active, metastasize into sociopaths ;-(
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 10, 2020, 12:01:53 PM
Yes, you can have Medicare-for-All ... except as such, you still need $200 per month per person (my mother's case) for someone in the commercial insurance sector to handle the paperwork for you.  Medicare is not only defauded constantly (ancient mainframe computers) but has a bureaucracy right out of 1980.

How to pay for it?  There is enough money, if you cut the other Federal programs.  The Feds already have enough money.  The problem is politicians only add, they don't adjust.  For instance you could cut the Defense Department budget in two ... but then you have to make a foreign policy where that makes sense.  You cannot also be a war-hawk and cut the Defense budget.  The conversion of Dems to war-hawks is one of the greatest surprises I have had.  Where are the anti-nuke protestors of the 80s?  Was it only because the President was a Republican (Reagan)?  Only because your beloved Soviet Union was still viable?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 10, 2020, 08:35:33 PM
Biden leading in M states:
Michigan
Mississippi
Missouri

No Results Yet:
North Dakota
Idaho
Washington

Dial M For Bernie "Murder"?

Some Bernie bros already threatening to completely boycott Dem party/election.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 11, 2020, 08:50:50 AM
Biden wins:
Michigan
Mississippi
Missouri
Idaho

Bernie wins:
North Dakota
Washington

So Bernie may be staying in awhile longer.

Dems know machine politics, and the Dems establishment tossed Bernie into the wood chipper.  A party only fit for Tin Men (yeah, that crybaby is a Beta).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 11, 2020, 12:11:29 PM
Unless there is an unexpected twist, Biden will be the nominee. Now the question is whether Bernie supporters will show up in November to support Biden or if they will stay home and allow Trump to be re-elected. I know Bernie supporters are disappointed but the reality is Sanders changed the national conversation regarding healthcare, worker's rights, wealth inequality and climate change. Biden and Sanders actually agree on far more than they disagree. Both champion universal health care, raising the minimum wage, raising taxes on the wealthy, wiping out student debt, making college affordable and leading the fight against climate change. They differ on how to get there. For Sanders, it’s revolution, or sudden change. For Biden, it’s evolution or gradual change.

Currently, there is online chatter from some Bernie supporters saying they are going to sit out or form their own party, #DemExit. I hope they don't do this because I think a second Trump term will have longterm negative ramifications particularly in the areas of healthcare, reproductive rights, social security and climate change. We shall see if Democrats can pull all their disagreeing factions together and motivate people to support Biden.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 11, 2020, 12:31:22 PM
Biden is preparing for a fireside chat this week, from the Summer White House in Delaware.  All scripted, will present the House version of the "stop coronavirus" action.  Senate heard Trump's plan, yawned, and went on vacation.  Trump has already been replaced?  Meanwhile ...

"Dead Man Walking - Hillary Overtakes Bernie In Democratic Primary Betting" ... like a kaiju ... Hillary rises again!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 11, 2020, 01:16:21 PM
My husband was cheering for Biden when Biden told this auto worker he was full of shit. That kind of authentic response is what a lot of voters want to see.

https://youtu.be/KPig-AllQe8
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 11, 2020, 02:25:56 PM
20 leading economists just signed a letter arguing Medicare for All would generate massive savings for American families

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/medicare-for-all-leading-economists-sign-letter-massive-savings-cost-2020-3-1028982592 (https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/medicare-for-all-leading-economists-sign-letter-massive-savings-cost-2020-3-1028982592)

"We believe the available research supports the conclusion that a program of Medicare for All (M4A) could be considerably less expensive than the current system, reducing waste and profiteering inherent in the current system, and could be financed in a way to ensure significant financial savings for the vast majority of American households," the economists wrote in the open letter.

"Most important, Medicare for All will reduce morbidity and save tens of thousands of lives each year," the group of economists said.

The letter was provided by Business for Medicare for All, an advocacy group pressing for universal healthcare in the US.

The economists aren't coming out in favor of a specific candidate, though some have individually consulted with Democratic presidential campaigns (at least one has endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders).

Instead, they're making the case that a government-run health insurance system would slash wasteful spending and generate massive savings for most Americans. ...

"There's been too much loose talk that Medicare for All is unaffordable," Friedman said. "What's really unaffordable is the current system. We spend about twice the average for affluent countries in the OECD on healthcare," referring to the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development.

Friedman also noted that increased spending often leads to worse health outcomes compared to other developed nations.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on March 11, 2020, 04:07:46 PM
I'm still going to get out and vote for Biden, and encourage people to do so, but realistically Trump has already won another 4 years.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 11, 2020, 04:30:59 PM
My husband was cheering for Biden when Biden told this auto worker he was full of shit. That kind of authentic response is what a lot of voters want to see.

https://youtu.be/KPig-AllQe8

Not in Detroit.  The Beta males were shocked, shocked, that a potential President had used a "bad" word ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 11, 2020, 04:34:07 PM
20 leading economists just signed a letter arguing Medicare for All would generate massive savings for American families

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/medicare-for-all-leading-economists-sign-letter-massive-savings-cost-2020-3-1028982592 (https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/medicare-for-all-leading-economists-sign-letter-massive-savings-cost-2020-3-1028982592)

"We believe the available research supports the conclusion that a program of Medicare for All (M4A) could be considerably less expensive than the current system, reducing waste and profiteering inherent in the current system, and could be financed in a way to ensure significant financial savings for the vast majority of American households," the economists wrote in the open letter.

"Most important, Medicare for All will reduce morbidity and save tens of thousands of lives each year," the group of economists said.

The letter was provided by Business for Medicare for All, an advocacy group pressing for universal healthcare in the US.

The economists aren't coming out in favor of a specific candidate, though some have individually consulted with Democratic presidential campaigns (at least one has endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders).

Instead, they're making the case that a government-run health insurance system would slash wasteful spending and generate massive savings for most Americans. ...

"There's been too much loose talk that Medicare for All is unaffordable," Friedman said. "What's really unaffordable is the current system. We spend about twice the average for affluent countries in the OECD on healthcare," referring to the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development.

Friedman also noted that increased spending often leads to worse health outcomes compared to other developed nations.

The point isn't to save American families any money.  Or ACA wouldn't have been the dumpster fire it was.  The point is to save the insurance company money, or if nationalized, all those insurance people get new jobs as government workers doing the same job as before.

Most economists are idiots ... and paid for hacks.  Only 6 of them predicted the 2008 problem, the other 99% were wrong.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on March 11, 2020, 05:46:33 PM


I expect Trump to get another term. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm not the only one who thinks that:




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JytJ8lf8aOQ
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 11, 2020, 08:56:26 PM
Unless there is an unexpected twist, Biden will be the nominee. Now the question is whether Bernie supporters will show up in November to support Biden or if they will stay home and allow Trump to be re-elected.
And unless there is another unexpected twist, Trump will come out victorious.  Biden's policies are...a substantial downgrade from Bernie's and imho, policy is Trump's weak spot.  Without hammering away at big policy changes and not generating much enthusiasm among our base, we're not going to get the turnout we need.  We're going into battle with our hands empty and our pants down.

Imo Biden supporters don't (yet) truly realize just what a kick in the balls Sanders' defeat is for us progressives.  The biggest grassroots progressive campaign this nation has ever seen is going down in flames and we're just as shocked and disappointed now as we were in 2016.  We are desperate for major reform.  I have close family members who lay awake at night because of student debt and distant relatives who struggle with medical costs.  This campaign isn't for Bernie, it's for them.  And the people who squashed their faint hope have the gall to smugly tell me that "this isn't a policy year".  Well, glad to hear it.  I'll be sure to carve that on their tombstones.

And it would be one thing if it was a fair fight and Biden just had the numbers, but Biden fumbled out of the lead and was predicted to lose hard on Super Tuesday, but got bailed out in an extremely coordinated and exceedingly spiteful campaign designed to deny Sanders the nomination he had earned and basically handed it to a candidate of their choice.  Well, congrats, it worked.

And here's the thing about the upcoming general election and the inevitable lesser of two evils argument:  Do not take our votes for granted.  If you want our votes, you're going to have to earn them.  And you don't earn a damn thing by not being Trump.

Progressives, who have worked tirelessly fighting for change in this country and got plenty of flak for it, are feeling a tad upset right now.  Ignored and humiliated by an establishment that doesn't listen to us  and ridicules our policy positions and then has the temerity to ask for our aid - with the implicit threat that we'll be blamed if they fail.  They don't blame themselves for not doing enough to earn our vote, they blame us for not giving it to them automatically and without hesitation - a very entitled position.  And to push the starting disposition even further towards distrust, I've read that Bloomberg might get a top post in Biden's administration (https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/03/09/all-you-need-know-biden-reportedly-weighing-billionaires-michael-bloomberg-and-jamie), yikes!

I absolutely understand how a principled person would not want to vote against their values.  Plus, the illiberal "moderate" Dems need to understand that there are consequences for alienating the liberal Dems and there are only consequences if we stop voting how they tell us to vote.  I am empathetic to that argument.

But I am reminded of the kids in cages and our lax (and getting laxxer!) environmental protections and so I will swallow my pride and assume the position.  Like Ted Cruz phone banking for Trump.  Utterly shameful.  But if that's what I have to do to potentially help people, I'll do it.  And all you Biden people better likewise get your asses out of your seats and start knocking on doors.  Maybe if you visited more rundown houses, you'd understand us Bernie supporters a little better.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 11, 2020, 09:03:55 PM
Oh, and I forgot this gem.  I wrote Biden off a while ago because he literally told me not to vote for him:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urNHi_dR5Gk

If you tell a potential ally to screw off and he does, who can you blame but yourself?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 12, 2020, 01:19:14 AM
David Pakman won't say this but one reason we have Biden instead of Bernie or a different moderate is because Biden has the majority of black support, specifically older black voters. In 2016, Hillary Clinton won the Democratic nomination with the majority of black support. In 2008, Barack Obama won the Democratic nomination with the majority of black support. In 2004, John Kerry won the Democratic nomination with the majority of black support. In 2000, Al Gore won the Democratic nomination with the majority of black support. In 1992, Bill Clinton won the Democratic nomination with the majority of black support. In fact, the last presidential candidate to earn the Democratic nomination without leading with black voters was Michael Dukakis, who lost 90% of the black vote to Jesse Jackson. Bernie, Buttigieg and others made efforts to win black voter support from Biden without success.

Yes, Trump is likely to win in November unless something extraordinary happens but I'm not giving up, even though Biden was around sixth on my list of Democratic candidates.

https://youtu.be/Iqkr9x2XxYY
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 12, 2020, 09:52:15 AM
Gave up on the "least worst candidate" voting method in 2016.  I feel sorry for Biden, even if he wasn't corrupt and a Clinton shill, it is sad to see an old man embarrass himself.  Biden must be afraid of jail for him and his family in a 2nd Trump administration.  I don't think any of those indictments will happen, they are too useful as blackmail (and blackmail doesn't work if you release the Kraken).

Yes, the Black vote is important.  Hillary didn't win enough of it in 2016, or she would have won.  It wasn't just lack of campaign appearances in Wisconsin and Michigan.  Of course, being corrupt, and being sick on the campaign trail (see Biden this year) didn't help her cause.

Go Tulsi Gabbard!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 12, 2020, 10:56:29 AM
David Pakman won't say this but one reason we have Biden instead of Bernie or a different moderate is because Biden has the majority of black support, specifically older black voters. In 2016, Hillary Clinton won the Democratic nomination with the majority of black support. In 2008, Barack Obama won the Democratic nomination with the majority of black support. In 2004, John Kerry won the Democratic nomination with the majority of black support. In 2000, Al Gore won the Democratic nomination with won the Democratic nomination with the majority of black support
And how many of those went on to win the general?

It is true that Biden captured the black vote, though Sanders was gaining ground prior to Super Tuesday.

(https://i.redd.it/14pu4qzfa6a41.jpg)

I should note that Sanders actually had a majority of younger black voters, while Biden had older black voters, so age - not race - really is the dominating factor.

And I've gotta tell ya, if we pit our base of Boomer liberals against Trump's base of Boomer conservatives, the Boomer liberals get crushed.  Why?  Because the older generations lean Republican.

(https://i.redd.it/miuvmna4x1m41.png)

To win, we absolutely need "young" voters (less than 49), latino voters, and a hefty amount of non-Democrats.  Bernie had that sort of broad grassroots support.  Biden doesn't.  If they were to combine their support (which seems unlikely without some major policy changes on Biden's part) the Dems might have a shot.  But as it's looking now, that's not going to happen and Trump's going to handedly win and then wether we fought for big changes or small changes, it won't matter because we get 4 more years of cages and corruption.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 12, 2020, 12:10:27 PM
I wonder how people would react to a Biden/Sanders ticket.

I have no idea how to get young people to actually go to the polls. 44.7 million Americans have student loan debt. Among the Class of 2019, 69% of college students took out student loans, and they graduated with an average debt of $29,900, including both private and federal debt. Meanwhile, 14% of their parents took out an average of $37,200 in federal parent PLUS loans. Sanders was essentially offering to give these people tens of thousands of dollars to vote for him.


Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on March 12, 2020, 12:34:19 PM
I wonder how people would react to a Biden/Sanders ticket.

I have no idea how to get young people to actually go to the polls. 44.7 million Americans have student loan debt. Among the Class of 2019, 69% of college students took out student loans, and they graduated with an average debt of $29,900, including both private and federal debt. Meanwhile, 14% of their parents took out an average of $37,200 in federal parent PLUS loans. Sanders was essentially offering to give these people tens of thousands of dollars to vote for him.
I think it might be because young voters are disenfranchised.  They may even believe in Sander's sincerity, but they recognize the system that is something forever beyond their control and a system that Sanders could never reform.  Maybe they are just expect things to be OK like it was for their parents.  And like the rest of us, perhaps they are brainwashed to accept the system as it is, because they have been told it's the best one possible. 

I didn't vote until I was 30, because I didn't think it would make a difference, and then people started telling me, "Suppose everyone felt that way, and bla bla bla."  So I started voting thinking I might be able to help.  Now I look back in my sunset years and think, "You know?  I think I may have been right back when I was under 30.  Changing the system is daunting, especially when you are still trying to figure out who you are and what you should major in."  Young people have different priorities, and back then we all thought our elders had some sort of wisdom.  After all, those were the ones who had been running society for ages.  They certainly should know what they are doing, right?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 12, 2020, 01:24:17 PM
I wonder how people would react to a Biden/Sanders ticket.
Probably not super well.  The telltale sign of a good compromise - both parties are grumbling.

But I'm not holding my breath.  Biden's reportedly under pressure to pick a black and/or female running mate for reasons.  Seems kinda dumb to pick someone who hasn't been in the running - at least you know that those people are good at attracting voters.

Quote
I have no idea how to get young people to actually go to the polls.
Extend early voting, more polling places (especially near workplaces), and/or making election day a holiday.  And it goes without saying, no more voter suppression (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/02/texas-polling-sites-closures-voting) (to which the Republicans reply: "no, more voter suppression)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 12, 2020, 01:35:49 PM
Biden's reportedly under pressure to pick a black and/or female running mate for reasons.

Michelle Obama would attract voters but she said she won't do it.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 12, 2020, 01:37:43 PM
I wonder how people would react to a Biden/Sanders ticket.

I have no idea how to get young people to actually go to the polls. 44.7 million Americans have student loan debt. Among the Class of 2019, 69% of college students took out student loans, and they graduated with an average debt of $29,900, including both private and federal debt. Meanwhile, 14% of their parents took out an average of $37,200 in federal parent PLUS loans. Sanders was essentially offering to give these people tens of thousands of dollars to vote for him.

Far better than a Biden/Clinton ticket or a Biden/Warren ticket or a Biden/Harris ticket. Not as good as a Biden/Gabbard ticket ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 12, 2020, 01:41:03 PM
Michelle Obama would attract voters but she said she won't do it.

Not been a Senator, not been Sec of State.  At least Sanders and Warren are Senators, and Gabbard was a Rep (she isn't running for reelection).

If we are really going for "shadow puppet" executives, with a PM doing the real work, like in Ireland ... then we can simply put a Hollywood person in the Presidency.  They have to only look good and talk good (to script).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 12, 2020, 01:48:19 PM
Probably not super well.  The telltale sign of a good compromise - both parties are grumbling.

But I'm not holding my breath.  Biden's reportedly under pressure to pick a black and/or female running mate for reasons.  Seems kinda dumb to pick someone who hasn't been in the running - at least you know that those people are good at attracting voters.
Extend early voting, more polling places (especially near workplaces), and/or making election day a holiday.  And it goes without saying, no more voter suppression (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/02/texas-polling-sites-closures-voting) (to which the Republicans reply: "no, more voter suppression)

All illegals get to vote, with picture ID/sanctuary cities?  Yes, Dems need more than dead people voting ;-)  We know there was widespread fraud in 2016 and in 2020 primary voting in Dem districts with lots of non-White voters.  And I don't care if all the illegals were blondes from Sweden.  I would purge all voter rolls well before November, make all people reregister with RealID.  Too many dead or moved to new address people in voter rolls.

But yes, sometimes they pick a nothing as VP (Governor of Alaska, Mr Potatoe-head) but that seems to be more of a Republican thing.  Gore and Mondale were viable former VPs, but not good campaigners.  Biden couldn't even beat Obama in 2008.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 12, 2020, 01:52:13 PM
Michelle Obama would attract voters but she said she won't do it.
Thank god.  I like Michelle Obama but that's an insane pick.  Afaik, she's never run for any public office.  Sure, being First Lady counts a little bit, but that's nothing compared to being a Senator or Governor or former VP.

Plus, I think we're already overdosing on Obama Nostalgia-brand Flavor Aid as it is.  Whatever happens in November, it's going to be a rude awakening for some of us.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on March 12, 2020, 01:56:39 PM
A lot of things can happen in 8 months. Maybe Trump's supporters will finally realize that they've been duped.

Well, one can hope...
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 12, 2020, 02:02:03 PM
Thank god.  I like Michelle Obama but that's an insane pick.  Afaik, she's never run for any public office.  Sure, being First Lady counts a little bit, but that's nothing compared to being a Senator or Governor or former VP.

Plus, I think we're already overdosing on Obama Nostalgia-brand Flavor Aid as it is.  Whatever happens in November, it's going to be a rude awakening for some of us.

Stay awake 24x7 until then.  Let the media see your blood-shot eyes on Nov 3!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 12, 2020, 02:03:01 PM
A lot of things can happen in 8 months. Maybe Trump's supporters will finally realize that they've been duped.

Well, one can hope...

Duped by D, duped by R ... duped either way.  If the voters are still alive by then ;-(

But no, Marxist theory per UC Berkeley 1965 ... probably won't win either way.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 12, 2020, 02:04:17 PM
A lot of things can happen in 8 months. Maybe Trump's supporters will finally realize that they've been duped.

Or maybe Coronavirus will kill off enough old conservatives...

(http://rs1181.pbsrc.com/albums/x439/esebulldog/triumph_zps690756ac.jpg~c200)



Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 12, 2020, 02:06:22 PM
Or maybe Coronavirus will kill off enough old conservatives...

(http://rs1181.pbsrc.com/albums/x439/esebulldog/triumph_zps690756ac.jpg~c200)

This is why I have a gun.  Millennials are much more tender to eat, if apocalypse arrives ;-))
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 12, 2020, 02:54:18 PM
A lot of things can happen in 8 months. Maybe Trump's supporters will finally realize that they've been duped.
Afaik, around 90% of Republicans support Trump and out of that, about a third say that there's nothing he could do or say that would cause them to withdraw their support.  It's only a slight exaggeration to say that Trump is God to them.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 12, 2020, 03:01:48 PM
Afaik, around 90% of Republicans support Trump and out of that, about a third say that there's nothing he could do or say that would cause them to withdraw their support.  It's only a slight exaggeration to say that Trump is God to them.

In Communism, officially atheist, Lenin used to be God to them (I think Putin has surpassed the wax dummy in Red Square in popularity).  In China Mao and Chou still are the wax dummies of choice.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 12, 2020, 03:59:44 PM
In Communism, officially atheist, Lenin used to be God to them (I think Putin has surpassed the wax dummy in Red Square in popularity).  In China Mao and Chou still are the wax dummies of choice.
So communist regimes aren't truly atheist?  Asking for a Fox and Friend who can't draw a line of disinction between people fighting for fifteen and people fighting for the Motherland.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 12, 2020, 05:54:43 PM
So communist regimes aren't truly atheist?  Asking for a Fox and Friend who can't draw a line of disinction between people fighting for fifteen and people fighting for the Motherland.

Never were.  They can't stand any alternative power structures.  If the alternative power structure was atheist aliens from Alpha Centauri ... they would claim theism to suppress them ;-)  And of course all historical communist regimes, aren't true communism ...
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on March 12, 2020, 11:32:02 PM
And I promised myself that I'd go canvassing for whomever the Dems nominate against Trump, so for IPU's sake, PLEASE give me policy reasons to sell this guy to people.  I'm begging you.
I want to point out that the whole idea behind my initial post was just to say, "Well, here's where I ended up."  I wrote only about the reasons why I intended to vote the way I chose.  I made no effort to try to say "and you should vote this way too".

Here's the deal.

I'm not going to give you policy reasons.  It's not my fucking job to give you policy reasons for a guy who was my fourth or fifth choice.

I want one thing: Trump out on his ass.  That's my sum total policy reason.  That's it.  No more, no less.  The only Dems that would've had me holding my nose before selecting them were Williamson, Bloomberg and Gabbard.  But I would have.  Because I am just too fucking tired of all the evil shit the Republicans do to care about anything more than unelecting as many of them as possible, and so fucking tired of politics in general that for the first time in my life I'm toying with the notion of skipping a primary.

Biden has one item on his résumé that Sanders doesn't: executive branch experience.  Otherwise, both are leading Trump by statistically the same amount in the polls and I don't fucking care who you vote for or which of them gets the nomination as long as that lying sack of shit is out on his fat ass -- and preferably on his way into a Federal courtroom on multiple criminal charges.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 13, 2020, 12:56:54 AM
I was glad George W couldn't run a third time.  Back then I wasn't voting at all.  Obama was my motivation to resume voting.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 13, 2020, 01:42:44 AM
I don't know whether it was Boy Scouts, four years of ROTC or Jesse Helms but I've voted in every major election since I was eligible. Voting in a presidential election is almost symbolic but votes really do matter in local elections.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 13, 2020, 08:14:43 AM
I don't know whether it was Boy Scouts, four years of ROTC or Jesse Helms but I've voted in every major election since I was eligible. Voting in a presidential election is almost symbolic but votes really do matter in local elections.
The last presidential election hinged on about 80,000 votes.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 13, 2020, 09:11:17 AM
The last presidential election hinged on about 80,000 votes.

Yes, but because of the electoral college and deep red or blue states some votes are more influential than others. Voting for the Democratic candidate in Alabama won't result in any electoral votes but voting Democrat in Michigan could make a real difference. We live in North Carolina, so our votes matter more than in many other states.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 13, 2020, 09:30:13 AM
March 17 Biden leading in Florida, Illinois, Ohio ... but Arizona?

Exciting Biden/Sanders debate this weekend.

Go Tulsi!

PS no Arizona poll more recent that last Monday (before last Primary round).

PPS new Arizona poll, Biden leading.  Bye bye Bernie.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 15, 2020, 11:29:18 AM
"Psychologist: Big Tech Will Use "Subliminal Methods" To Shift 15 Million Votes On Election Day" ... worked on me, I was brainwashed into not intending to vote this year, or ever after ;-)

"Democrats Want To Reverse Trump's Travel Bans Despite Coronavirus Spread" ... like moths drawn to a flame.

US military goes into partial lockdown ... next 60 days.  Military personnel, associated civilians, and their families are forbidden to travel outside their immediate work area.  I would be hip deep in this right now, if I hadn't retired.  Separate FOIA request also shows that the plan includes a requirement for Intel folks to keep 3 month of supplies handy (in case all stores are closed).  JIT supply chains mean there is only ever 3 days of Chinese junk on the shelves, and no local warehouses.

Meanwhile a pre-planned giant US to Europe military exercise is going ahead, in spite of the virus.  "We are from the USA, we are here to help you" ;-)  I thought it was to be Black Helicopters with UN troops arriving to "help" the US ;-)

If there is a general ban on internal travel, that means putting off the remaining primaries, the conventions and the election.  So hope we don't go full Italy. 

Seattle has already had a quarantine person run loose.  In Tel Aviv, a man who did this, got tackled by special forces in hazmat suits.  Here in the US we should use butterfly nets to capture all the nut jobs ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 16, 2020, 07:15:41 AM
In the pseudo-debate last night, both Sanders and Biden competing to who will have a woman VP.  Why Hillary, when Sarah Palin is helicopter ready? ;-)

Sorry, with Hillary as VP, Joe or Bernie will be resigned for health reasons or dead within a week of inauguration.  At least with a black hispanic women who is gay and trans-sexual things will be interesting ;-)

Was talking yesterday with a transexual man, half Polish, half Mayan, but all American.  Grew up in Illinois and Arkansas.  He is more Republican leaning than I am.  So good luck finding a VP to the left of Fidel Castro.

Identity politics is just getting people to play victim, so they can be pandered to and vote purchased, out on the Democrat plantation.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 16, 2020, 12:30:11 PM
(https://i.redd.it/i8aoy9dkbym41.jpg)

FFS joe, focus on policy, not identity politics.  No one cares if your running mate has green skin and a prehensile tail if your policies fail people who are hurting bad right now.

We are looking for a crisis management team, not the cast for a new drama series.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 16, 2020, 08:00:27 PM
Yes, American politics is a drama series.  That is why we now have a "reality show" host as President.  But I will no longer buy into this worn out Twin Peaks crap-alike.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 17, 2020, 11:49:02 PM
Arizona - not tabulated yet
Ohio - delayed due to virus
Illinois - 58.3% Biden, 36.9% Sanders - as expected
Florida - 61.7% Biden, 22.8% Sanders - as expected
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 18, 2020, 06:08:59 AM
Arizona - not tabulated yet
Ohio - delayed due to virus
Illinois - 58.3% Biden, 36.9% Sanders - as expected
Florida - 61.7% Biden, 22.8% Sanders - as expected

Arizona - 43.6 Biden, 31.6 Sanders - as expected

Bernie stays in the race, hoping Biden keels over before he does!

Dems, most pathetic political party on the planet.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 18, 2020, 09:12:14 AM
"Biden Wins!?: Illinois News Station Airs Election Results Day Before Primary" ... joining Hillary and Dewey in the ranks of dubious election winners ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 19, 2020, 04:00:03 PM
"ILHAN OMAR PRAISES TRUMP'S "INCREDIBLE" JOB DEALING WITH PANDEMIC, PROGRESSIVES SLAM DEMOCRATS"" ... AOC also praised Trump.  It is Pelosi and Schumer who are blocking the third tranche (money for deplorables).  Neo-lib Dems only want to please their Goldman-Sachs & Ukrainian oligarch masters.

The Art Of The Deal ... strikes again!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 19, 2020, 04:22:29 PM
Gabbard has withdrawn and endorsed Biden ;-(  I still think highly of her.  Her lawsuit continues forward against Hitlery.

Warren hasn't endorsed anyone yet, but her supporters support Sanders.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 19, 2020, 04:28:24 PM
Gabbard has withdrawn and endorsed Biden ;-(  I still think highly of her.

I thought she would have endorsed Sanders, if she gave any endorsement at all.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 19, 2020, 08:10:22 PM
I thought she would have endorsed Sanders, if she gave any endorsement at all.

Warren is a bitter old school marm.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Gawdzilla Sama on March 20, 2020, 06:59:23 AM
Randall Flagg, 2020!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 20, 2020, 06:55:04 PM
New new speak ...

CNN = Chinese News Network
MSNBC = Make Sure Nobody Blames China
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 20, 2020, 08:43:34 PM
"Supreme Identity Politics: Biden Pledges To Only Consider Black Females For SCOTUS Pick" ... unfortunately Barbara Jordan is unavailable ;-(

"In the KUT-FM radio documentary Rediscovering Barbara Jordan, President Bill Clinton said that he had wanted to nominate Jordan for the United States Supreme Court, but by the time he could do so, Jordan's health problems prevented him from nominating her. Jordan later also suffered from leukemia."
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 21, 2020, 05:44:23 PM
US political news ...

"MILITARY VEHICLES SPOTTED IN MASSIVE NUMBERS BEING SHIPPED INTO CITIES" ... Marines flew over me the other day, Semper Fi!

"UNEMPLOYMENT CLAIMS PREDICTED TO HIT TWO MILLION, THE WORST IN US HISTORY" ... surplus productive capacity leads to a surplus of labor, which leads to the Army of the Unemployed ... per Karl Marx ... President Hoover, Gen MacArthur, Maj Patton and Maj Eisenhower broke up the Bonus March on Washington DC, in 1932.

"THE TRUMP STIMULUS IS COMING: AND THE DEMS ARE TERRIFIED" ... very gay, will Trump use lube?

"JOE BIDEN IS NOW THE PRESUMPTIVE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE" ... senile old man, sad.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 22, 2020, 07:50:11 AM
US Election Delays:

"Primaries scheduled for Georgia, Ohio, Maryland, Indiana, Louisiana, Connecticut and Kentucky have all been postponed to May or June. The Rhode Island Board of Elections has recommended the primary be delayed to June, while officials in Wisconsin are debating what to do." ... Wisconsin = cheeseheads ;-)

"Runoff elections in Alabama, Texas and Mississippi were also delayed, as were local elections in Oklahoma, Missouri and New Jersey."
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: aitm on March 22, 2020, 09:39:16 AM
Many people don’t know that Hitlers “torture” experiments would go on to produce many valuable lessons to the medical community and help Bayer become the giant medical company they became. But, not a good note to use on a campaign.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 26, 2020, 10:50:39 AM
"Believe All Women, Right? Biden Accused Of Sexual Assault" ... so either nominate a woman, or the Feminists won't vote for you, or nominate an African-American or "BLM" won't vote for you.  Identity politics is so funny.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 26, 2020, 05:45:31 PM
""Democrats need little from the front-runner beyond his corporeal presence," Atlantic contributor Alex Wagner wrote" in article in Atlantic magazine.  Well, that is about all they will get by November, if they are lucky.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Jason Harvestdancer on March 29, 2020, 10:14:32 AM
Tucker Carlson Insists Biden ‘Will Not Be The Democratic Nominee.’ Here’s Who He Predicts Will Assume The Mantle (https://dailycaller.com/2020/03/27/tucker-carlson-joe-biden-andrew-cuomo-democratic-nominee/)

To cut the click-bait, he says Andrew Cuomo.

Take it for what you will, he may or may not be right about the first half of his prediction.  If he is right about the first half, he may or may not be right about the second half.

The only think I can think of about his commentary is thus: if it is not Biden, and therefore if it is anyone except Sanders, the Sanders supporters are going to go nuts.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 29, 2020, 11:42:04 AM
1. Sanders supporters are nuts ;-)

2. Andrew Cuomo is better than Biden or Sanders ... or Hillary.  President Cuomo would get ... respect!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 29, 2020, 03:21:28 PM
I think Andrew Cuomo is a bit busy at the moment. I also don't think Tucker Carlson has the Democrats best interest at heart by trying to undermine confidence in Biden.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Munch on March 29, 2020, 05:21:19 PM
Whelp, they've made gay porn of corona now.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on March 29, 2020, 06:10:32 PM
I think Andrew Cuomo is a bit busy at the moment. I also don't think Tucker Carlson has the Democrats best interest at heart by trying to undermine confidence in Biden.

Yeah, the Democrat's really should go with a senile old man who can barely string a sentence together and has a history of sexual harassment. That seems like a winning strategy.

Actually, given who the current president is... maybe they actually are onto something.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 29, 2020, 06:37:00 PM
I think Andrew Cuomo is a bit busy at the moment. I also don't think Tucker Carlson has the Democrats best interest at heart by trying to undermine confidence in Biden.

You have confidence in Biden? ;-( 

Governor Cuomo is zipping around personally curing old people in a borrowed Flash suit?

Anyone who isn't a Dem (Tucker Carlson) is a Nazi/Racist?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 29, 2020, 06:37:32 PM
Yeah, the Democrat's really should go with a senile old man who can barely string a sentence together and has a history of sexual harassment. That seems like a winning strategy.

Actually, given who the current president is... maybe they actually are onto something.

Hardly.  Michelle Obama is the Messiah ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on March 29, 2020, 07:27:39 PM
Yeah, the Democrat's really should go with a senile old man who can barely string a sentence together and has a history of sexual harassment. That seems like a winning strategy.

Actually, given who the current president is... maybe they actually are onto something.
The boomers (and democratic establishment) have never been wrong about anything before.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on March 29, 2020, 09:24:12 PM
You have confidence in Biden? ;-( 

Governor Cuomo is zipping around personally curing old people in a borrowed Flash suit?

Anyone who isn't a Dem (Tucker Carlson) is a Nazi/Racist?

I said none of those things.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 29, 2020, 09:44:51 PM
I said none of those things.

OK.  I over thought it.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on March 29, 2020, 10:34:52 PM
Tucker Carlson Insists Biden ‘Will Not Be The Democratic Nominee.’ Here’s Who He Predicts Will Assume The Mantle (https://dailycaller.com/2020/03/27/tucker-carlson-joe-biden-andrew-cuomo-democratic-nominee/)

To cut the click-bait, he says Andrew Cuomo.

Take it for what you will, he may or may not be right about the first half of his prediction.  If he is right about the first half, he may or may not be right about the second half.

The only think I can think of about his commentary is thus: if it is not Biden, and therefore if it is anyone except Sanders, the Sanders supporters are going to go nuts.
And that may be exactly the kind of discord Carlson's trying to sow.  As it stands, I don't have a lot of faith in Carlson's prognosticative abilities in the first place, so I feel safe just dismissing his opinion.  He's just trying to cause trouble to try to distract attention from a presidency in crisis.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 30, 2020, 05:02:36 AM
Crisis?  Caused by the Yellow Peril?  Why was Obama or Bush or Clinton not a crisis?

Is conformism and checking your brain at the door, a good thing?  It is if you are an authoritarian looking to weaponize such people.

The idea that even in a family, people will have unanimity of purpose or of politics, ls dreaming.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on March 30, 2020, 06:19:23 AM
Hardly.  Michelle Obama is the Messiah ;-)

Shit, at this point I would take her over Biden even though she has literally no qualifications other than a functioning brain (which makes her more appealing than basically every other candidate than Bernie).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 30, 2020, 07:25:49 AM
"Truthdig staff laid off amid work stoppage" ... Left media just like the rest, it is all about selling laundry soap, not issues ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 30, 2020, 07:26:30 AM
Shit, at this point I would take her over Biden even though she has literally no qualifications other than a functioning brain (which makes her more appealing than basically every other candidate than Bernie).

I would be tempted.  Particularly if she really is "Michael".  Just to see people's heads pop off.  That is why I voted for Obama the first time.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on March 30, 2020, 08:42:26 AM
Correction to my previous post: Michelle is actually qualified in that she has a J.D. in law, which is about as close to "qualified" as someone can get and I don't doubt for a second she busted her ass off to get that. However the "qualifications" that would lead to her election are her last name, not her own personal achievements, and I'm not comfortable with being elected because of who your family is (looking at you, Clintons, Bushes, Obamas, and about 3/4th of all presidents in our history as we pretend we are so much more evolved than monarchies).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 30, 2020, 12:09:35 PM
Correction to my previous post: Michelle is actually qualified in that she has a J.D. in law, which is about as close to "qualified" as someone can get and I don't doubt for a second she busted her ass off to get that. However the "qualifications" that would lead to her election are her last name, not her own personal achievements, and I'm not comfortable with being elected because of who your family is (looking at you, Clintons, Bushes, Obamas, and about 3/4th of all presidents in our history as we pretend we are so much more evolved than monarchies).

The biggest Deep State criteria is ... are you related to the British Royals ;-))
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on March 30, 2020, 12:18:26 PM
"Trump's Approval Rating Soars As Media Seeks Blackout" ... giggle.  It was the MSM continuous opposition in 2016 that made Trump well known enough to get elected in the first place.  They are trying to avoid that, but the more they put Biden on TV, the fewer votes he will get.  I am not just Independent, but Dischordian.  The random actions of 7 billion people validate my position.  Government action is one Keystone Cops/Chinese Fire Brigade after another.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on April 08, 2020, 12:34:36 PM
Bernie's out (https://www.10tv.com/article/sanders-drops-2020-bid-leaving-biden-likely-nominee-2020-apr).

Smart to do it now and give the party time to come back together after a fractious campaign.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 08, 2020, 01:03:39 PM
The majority of dems - 77% - support Medicare for All, and now we're represented by a candidate who says he would veto it.

The outcome of this race wasn't decided by the people, it was decided by special interests and the mega-rich.  They determine policy now, not the people.  And they've decided that we're either going to get 4 more years of the dumpster fire of Trump or 4 years where nothing fundamentally changes for struggling Americans.  Either way, their interests are upheld and Americans' interests are ignored or eroded even further.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 08, 2020, 02:21:03 PM
The majority of dems - 77% - support Medicare for All, and now we're represented by a candidate who says he would veto it.

The outcome of this race wasn't decided by the people, it was decided by special interests and the mega-rich.  They determine policy now, not the people.  And they've decided that we're either going to get 4 more years of the dumpster fire of Trump or 4 years where nothing fundamentally changes for struggling Americans.  Either way, their interests are upheld and Americans' interests are ignored or eroded even further.

Not done yet.  Will the world's first remote electronic vaping convention choose him?  Superdelegates aren't so sure.  Also how long will his female VP choice let him live?  With an electronic convention, they don't have to worry about Bernie Bros burning Milwaukee down.  Also Bernie probably waited this long, because he was a little short in buying his 4th house ;-))
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 08, 2020, 03:16:47 PM
https://fair.org/home/nyt-writes-post-mortems-for-a-sanders-campaign-it-did-its-best-to-kill/

Quote
A March 30 Times article (3/30/20) discussed a Washington Post/ABC News poll that found Republicans are more excited to vote for Trump than Democrats are to vote for Biden. Just 24% of voters said they were “very enthusiastic” about voting for Biden in the presidential race—the lowest level of enthusiasm for a presidential candidate the Post and ABC have recorded in 20 years.

There was no mention of why many voters might be less excited to vote for Biden—aside from the fact that during the coronavirus, people are preoccupied. There was no mention, for example, of Medicare for All, a program that is extremely popular among Democratic voters—76% supported it in the latest Morning Consult poll (4/1/20), up 9 points in net approval since the impact of the pandemic was widely felt—but is decisively rejected by the former vice president, who says of the coronavirus crisis (NBCNews.com, 3/30/20), “Single payer will not solve that at all.”

The Times piece acknowledges that voter enthusiasm can be the critical difference between who shows up to polls and who stays home, but does not entertain the fact that Sanders’ voting base is notoriously dedicated and enthusiastic. The poll the article cited did not compare how excited citizens would be to vote for Sanders vs. Trump.

A 538 blog post (4/1/20) pointed out how former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had a similar enthusiasm problem in 2016 — one that ultimately cost her the presidency. The Times failed to draw that same parallel in the brief article that pointed out Biden’s enthusiasm gap.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 08, 2020, 05:28:26 PM
I have understood that democracy has been broken in the US most of my adult life.  I compare the direct democracy (of male citizens) to how we behave in the US.  There is no comparison (aside from tiny New England village politics).  Even my Condo association in the 80s quickly went from direct democracy to "management agent".  And Athenian democracy was a failure even with 4000 active participants in decision making (not counting courts etc).  Basically we would all need to be landed aristocrats, with the desire to waste 1/2 our time every day on public affairs ... like 18th century English, who failed to handle the American Revolution successfully ... treating the unwashed as employees or worse.  The American South idolized ancient Greece (and landed aristocracy).  The Federalists idolized ancient Rome (and militarism).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 08, 2020, 06:47:31 PM
Bernie's out (https://www.10tv.com/article/sanders-drops-2020-bid-leaving-biden-likely-nominee-2020-apr).

Smart to do it now and give the party time to come back together after a fractious campaign.

Ah yes, come back together to same-ol' same-ol', business as usual that cost them the election last year, and has lead to America becoming an increasingly economically divided and struggling country for the last few decades. A country that under both Republicans and Democrats have seen student debt balloon to 1.6 trillion dollars, that has had corruption scandals increase steadily, that has seen it's infrastructure decay. That has seen the racial divide (and I don't mean socially, I mean economically) grow under both parties. That has seen the longest war in American history continue under both parties.

Great. Looking forward to it. More of the same. Wonderful.

That's exactly what we need after a major catastrophe that will cripple the American economy for years to come, is more of the same politics that already had economists concerned about inequality and a stock market collapse.


I don't even necessarily think Bernie was the answer, or that he would have beaten Trump, but at least he was a step in the right direction. But the DNC, the mainstream Democrats and the media all said fuck that, we want more of the same, and that's the most frustrating part of it all.


We are sailing towards the iceberg, and the passengers are all screaming at each other and both are telling the captain to sail faster towards it.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on April 08, 2020, 07:00:06 PM
Ah yes, come back together to same-ol' same-ol', business as usual that cost them the election last year, and has lead to America becoming an increasingly economically divided and struggling country for the last few decades. A country that under both Republicans and Democrats have seen student debt balloon to 1.6 trillion dollars, that has had corruption scandals increase steadily, that has seen it's infrastructure decay. That has seen the racial divide (and I don't mean socially, I mean economically) grow under both parties. That has seen the longest war in American history continue under both parties.

Great. Looking forward to it. More of the same. Wonderful.

That's exactly what we need after a major catastrophe that will cripple the American economy for years to come, is more of the same politics that already had economists concerned about inequality and a stock market collapse.

I don't even necessarily think Bernie was the answer, or that he would have beaten Trump, but at least he was a step in the right direction. But the DNC, the mainstream Democrats and the media all said fuck that, we want more of the same, and that's the most frustrating part of it all.

We are sailing towards the iceberg, and the passengers are all screaming at each other and both are telling the captain to sail faster towards it.
Do you genuinely believe that a Biden presidency and four more years of the Oval Orifice would be indistinguishable?

Also, not a lot of sympathy here.  I had three of my preferences drop out before I had to settle.

So what's your priority, getting your way, or getting rid of that lying sack of racist shit infesting our White House?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 08, 2020, 07:05:18 PM
Also, not a lot of sympathy here.  I had three of my preferences drop out before I had to settle.
Ever notice that all we seem to be doing lately has been settling?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on April 08, 2020, 07:08:39 PM
Ever notice that all we seem to be doing lately has been settling?
Politics is not a clean, cut and dried thing.  Also, every single one of the Democrats running (with the possible exceptions of Williamson, Bloomberg and Gabbard -- and of them, only Williamson would've been too horrible to vote for) were and are a fuckton more qualified, more sensible and more humane than that evil sack of shit Trump, and would be a better President.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on April 08, 2020, 07:13:25 PM
Also, before we get sidetracked into conspiracy theory bullshit, the conspiracy you need to be mad about is the way the media enable the Oval Orifice.  I remind you what CBS CEO Les Moonves said of Trump in 2016: "It may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS. (https://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/02/les-moonves-trump-cbs-220001)"

Quote from: Les Moonves
"Man, who would have expected the ride we're all having right now? ... The money's rolling in and this is fun," Moonves went on. "I've never seen anything like this, and this going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It's a terrible thing to say. But, bring it on, Donald. Keep going.”

THAT is your real problem, not divisions within the Democratic party -- which the media will exploit to keep their ratings cash cow in office.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 08, 2020, 07:41:13 PM
Quote
Do you genuinely believe that a Biden presidency and four more years of the Oval Orifice would be indistinguishable?

Never said it would be.

Quote
So what's your priority, getting your way, or getting rid of that lying sack of racist shit infesting our White House?

Neither.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 08, 2020, 07:45:25 PM
Also, the fact that I've yet to hear a single pro-Biden argument that involves his policy is a huge tell.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SoldierofFortune on April 08, 2020, 07:55:51 PM
Politicians are like diapers. They should both be changed frequently and for the same reason. -- Anonymous
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 08, 2020, 09:24:12 PM
People love their teams, and team captains.  But this isn't a sport. It is psychosis.

Orange Man Bad?  Hitlery?  Creepy Joe?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 08, 2020, 09:35:55 PM
Also, the fact that I've yet to hear a single pro-Biden argument that involves his policy is a huge tell.
It's not a policy year.

But have you heard that he's not Trump?  That's a hell of a compelling argument.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 08, 2020, 10:15:04 PM
It's not a policy year.

But have you heard that he's not Trump?  That's a hell of a compelling argument.

Not Hitlery?  Thank G-d.  But we have months to wait and see ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 08, 2020, 10:19:15 PM
Not Hitlery?  Thank G-d.  But we have months to wait and see ;-)

Honestly, at this point I wouldn't even be surprised if Biden isn't the nominee because of his failing mental capacities and the rape allegations and they decided to put Hillary up for election yet again.

(Of course, Democrats seem to have no real problem with the 8 people who have made allegations against Biden, because innocent until proven guilty... just ignore all the rhetoric about believing women, #MeTooUnlessYoureBlue
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 08, 2020, 10:28:30 PM
Honestly, at this point I wouldn't even be surprised if Biden isn't the nominee because of his failing mental capacities and the rape allegations and they decided to put Hillary up for election yet again.
I almost forgot about that.  Man, I can't wait to knock on doors and try to defend someone who might have sexually assaulted someone.  That's going to be a blast.

Can you imagine trying to defend a presidential candidate not under criminal investigation or not facing rape allegations?  It's been a while.  I'm a little rusty.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 08, 2020, 10:43:10 PM
One last thing I forgot to mention...

I have the "privilege" of living in a state where my vote doesn't matter anyways. I could vote for Micky Mouse and it would make just as much difference. I will most likely just write Bernie in, because he at least ran on a campaign of giving my vote a voice. Biden has not.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 08, 2020, 10:55:04 PM
One last thing I forgot to mention...

I have the "privilege" of living in a state where my vote doesn't matter anyways. I could vote for Micky Mouse and it would make just as much difference. I will most likely just write Bernie in, because he at least ran on a campaign of giving my vote a voice. Biden has not.
Texas?  Isn't that a swing state?  (https://theweek.com/speedreads/826395/texas-now-2020-swing-state) That's what they tell me but strangely, it always seems to go red.  Maybe the locals aren't in the know?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 08, 2020, 10:58:43 PM
Texas?  Isn't that a swing state?  (https://theweek.com/speedreads/826395/texas-now-2020-swing-state) That's what they tell me but strangely, it always seems to go red.  Maybe the locals aren't in the know?

I honestly don't know. I feel like we are becoming one, but it's also based on our minority and youth population, both of which don't generally vote.

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 08, 2020, 11:31:51 PM
And the good news keeps rolling in: Biden enters the general election about where Hillary Clinton did in 2016 (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/biden-enters-the-general-election-about-where-hillary-clinton-did-in-2016/ar-BB12l8sN)

I gotta say, those people who insist that Biden has "electability" had better be right.  Cause if they're wrong, they may have just screwed America into enduring Trump's disgusting reign for another four years.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on April 09, 2020, 12:04:35 AM
And the good news keeps rolling in: Biden enters the geoneral election about where Hillary Clinton did in 2016 (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/biden-enters-the-general-election-about-where-hillary-clinton-did-in-2016/ar-BB12l8sN)

I gotta say, those people who insist that Biden has "electability" had better be right.  Cause if they're wrong, they may have just screwed America into enduring Trump's disgusting reign for another four years.

I don't know what is going to happen with the election. Most Democrats I know voted against Sanders not for Biden. I've talked to passionate supporters of Bernie, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Warren, Yang and Trump but yet to meet an enthusiastic Biden supporter. I also wonder if Biden, Bernie or Trump will become ill before November given the number of people predicted to be exposed to COVID-19, the ages of the candidates, their medical conditions and the number of people with whom they interact. The infection doesn't have to be lethal to take them out of the race.

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on April 09, 2020, 12:24:53 AM
Never said it would be.
Could've fooled me the way you're carrying on.  So your candidate didn't win.  Wah.  Neither did three of mine.  Get over it, it's time to deal with the world the way it turned out instead of the way you wanted it to turn out.

You don't like the top of the ticket?  Fine, don't care, I don't either especially.  Find some local, county and state candidates you can get behind instead of bitching and moaning.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 09, 2020, 12:50:49 AM
Most Democrats I know voted against Sanders not for Biden. I've talked to passionate supporters of Bernie, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Warren, Yang and Trump but yet to meet an enthusiastic Biden supporter.
That's really sad.  If you're not fighting for something, you've already lost.  I thought we learned that lesson in 2016.  Apparently, it didn't stick.  I suppose we'll have to learn it all over again.

Quote
I also wonder if Biden, Bernie or Trump will become ill before November given the number of people predicted to be exposed to COVID-19, the ages of the candidates, their medical conditions and the number of people with whom they interact. The infection doesn't have to be lethal to take them out of the race.
Well, Trump falsified his own physical, so he could be walking around with a T-virus infection and we'd never know until he takes a chunk out of someone's neck.  He's dealt with this coroavirus crisis on a personal and professional level with all the genius one would expect from a guy who stares directly at a solar eclipse.

Biden's been doing a good job staying isolated, so he should be okay so long as he remembers to maintain that social distance, which has historically been hard for him.

I'm not particularly worried about either of them.  It's the people's health that's the problem.  People are dying in droves and it's I take no responsibility this and how are you going to pay for it that.  It really would have been nice to have someone institute some sort of social safety net prior to this disaster.  But where would we find someone like that?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 09, 2020, 01:20:43 AM
Quote
Get over it, it's time to deal with the world the way it turned out instead of the way you wanted it to turn out.

I am.

If my option is to vote for a racist, rapist who doesn't represent my interests, or a racist, accused rapist who doesn't represent my interests, I will deal with it in the way that seems morally right to me; vote for neither of them.

- Joe Biden has family ties to pharmaceutical companies and has faced allegations of using those ties to enrich his brother.

- Joe Biden was a firm supporter in getting Scalia, one of the worst Justices in American history, on the court. Then when it became unpopular, he denounced him. Then when Scalia died, he went on and on about how great of person he was.

- Joe Biden has multiple allegations of sexual harassment against him, including one rape allegation, as well as multiple clips of him inappropriately handling little girls.

- Joe Biden's supporters have literally spent months insulting people like me, and now that Bernie has dropped out are demanding that I owe them my support.

- Joe Biden has a very sketchy record on African-Americans, from being against anti-segregation laws (such as voting against forcing schools to reveal the ethnic makeup of their students so the Fed couldn't punish schools resisting integration) or saying shit like...

Quote from: 1975, Washington Post
“What it says is, ‘In order for your child with curly black hair, brown eyes, and dark skin to be able to learn anything, he needs to sit next to my blond-haired, blue-eyed son.’ That’s racist!”

Quote from: 1975, NPR
“I think the concept of busing … that we are going to integrate people so that they all have the same access and they learn to grow up with one another and all the rest, is a rejection of the whole movement of black pride … a rejection of the entire black awareness concept, where black is beautiful, black culture should be studied; and the cultural awareness of the importance of their own identity, their own individuality.”

In 2007, when presented with evidence that busing was incredibly effective at increasing the educational levels of African Americans, he continued to say that he was in the right for saying those things.

His criminal law record is also horrendous as well, with his signature bill leading to tens of thousands of African Americans being incarcerated at a massively disproportionate ratio to whites, and with harsher penalties than before.

Oh, and of course he said this...

Quote
“Former Vice President Joe Biden is facing increased scrutiny over his record on busing and racial issues, and this week old comments resurfaced in which he said, in 1977, that busing for the purpose of desegregation would cause his children to ‘grow up in a racial jungle.

I could go on, but you get the point.

Look, if you want to vote for him... I honestly have no problem with that. But I keep on being told the racist, senile and accused sexual harasser and rapist is "owed" my vote because he is not Trump and that I'm in the wrong for not just bowing down and licking his boots. That's absolute bullshit, and you know it.

Vote for whoever the fuck you want, but don't try to shame me because I find them to be disgusting candidates.

Or better yet, GIVE ME A GOOD REASON TO VOTE FOR BIDEN OTHER THAN "ORANGE MAN BADDDDD!!!".

Shit, I don't mind his environmental proposals and infrastructure plans... some of them actually sound pretty good, if he actually stays true to them. But I need more than that, and not one person who has told me to vote for Biden has actually been able to point to a policy of his that should sway my vote.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on April 09, 2020, 03:04:26 AM
That's really sad.  If you're not fighting for something, you've already lost.  I thought we learned that lesson in 2016.

Are you fighting for Biden now that Sanders has dropped out? I'm supporting Biden. Now that Bernie has dropped out I'm ordering a Biden bumper sticker to put over my Yang sticker. My candidate didn't win, I think Biden is better than Trump and that is how I will vote.

For those who can't in good conscience vote for Biden, don't vote for him. However remember voting for Biden isn't just voting for the man but for the Democratic party. The Republicans are specifically targeting reproductive rights and are putting justices in place at various levels who are morally opposed to abortion. Trump and the Republicans are planning to cut social security. The Democrats have a much better track record on environmental protection and supporting measures to address climate change. Republicans routinely argue that racism in America doesn't even exist while Democrats at least recognize the problem. Trump wants to get rid of the ACA and has no plan to expand access to healthcare. Trump has helped the wealthy maintain and expand their fortunes at every opportunity. If these are things you care about then I would urge you to consider the consequences of another four years of Republican control of the executive branch.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 09, 2020, 03:48:55 AM
Quote
However remember voting for Biden isn't just voting for the man but for the Democratic party.

And that's the problem; the Democratic party doesn't represent the voter anymore than the Republican party. Shit, I would say the Republican party if anything represents it's voters better than the Dems do... Republicans vote for them BECAUSE of their flaws and shitty views, while Dems vote for the party because they hope they will be progressive and lead to real change just to be let down election after election after election.


The more votes a "moderate" like Biden gets (and by moderate, I mean by American standards, so slightly right-wing by global standards), the more the Dem party realises that it's okay to fuck over progressives and move further right.

Quote
Trump and the Republicans are planning to cut social security.

Biden has voted along with them several times throughout his career.

Quote
Republicans routinely argue that racism in America doesn't even exist while Democrats at least recognize the problem.

Biden doesn't seem to, given that he was making racist remarks as recently as recently as... *checks notes*... this election cycle.

Quote
Trump wants to get rid of the ACA and has no plan to expand access to healthcare.

Don't get me wrong, I realise people do benefit from the ACA and I don't want to see them taken off it, but at the same time me and basically everyone else I know is still uninsured (unless their parents have insurance) because we are "too wealthy" to apply for government aide and too poor to actually afford healthcare.

Quote
Trump has helped the wealthy maintain and expand their fortunes at every opportunity.

And the Democrats haven't? The wage gap grew under Clinton/Obama, the amount of Americans in debt while the rich got richer grew under Clinton/Obama... it's been a long while since we didn't have a Wall Street approved candidate.

The environment is the only one I give him real credit on, but we also know just how cheap talk is. Especially since he has campaigned for Republicans in the past and Republican donors started sending him donations this election as well, knowing he aligned with their views much more than most.

Again, I'm not saying don't vote for Biden... but for the love of god, can someone please give me a reason to vote for him other than, "At least he isn't Trump!"? It's depressing to see that even here it's just "Us vs Them".
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 09, 2020, 05:13:07 AM
Let me reword it in a shorter way;

You are asking me to choose the "lesser of two evil" who has a long tract record of segregationist racism and sexual harassment, who seems to be in a state of mental decline and who will continue the status quo that has left me, my family, my friends and millions of other Americans struggling economically and mentally. If that's the "lesser", then either way I'm fucked.

Both of them have their boots on my throat and are crushing down, and neither of them have any intention of letting off.

Perhaps if things get worse quicker, people will grow more desperate quicker and angry enough to frighten them into make meaningful change. But the way I see it, the guy putting a little less force on me isn't going to suddenly stop just because I praised him for not being as bad as the other guy. He will just feel more emboldened to keep on going.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on April 09, 2020, 05:19:10 AM
If you choose to vote, there are two viable options and voters pick the one they dislike the least. I've explained why I prefer Biden to Trump. I too wish the options were different, I tried to make a difference, but this is where we are. It's a frustrating system and I don't expect you to be happy about it. I completely understand if you decide to abstain.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on April 09, 2020, 06:40:34 AM
If you choose to vote, there are two viable options and voters pick the one they dislike the least. I've explained why I prefer Biden to Trump. I too wish the options were different, I tried to make a difference, but this is where we are. It's a frustrating system and I don't expect you to be happy about it. I completely understand if you decide to abstain.
Shiranu actually reflects much of my own thinking.  I don't like the idea of not voting.  I want to vote.  But the lesser of two evils doesn't motivate me.  Yeah, maybe Biden is better than Trump, but neither Biden or Hillary struck me as that much better, and both seemed to be content with an image that was just better than Trump and nothing more.  No one is going to motivate me to become energized by just being better than Trump.  That bar is far too low for me to bother with, and the lesser of two evils argument from the official Democratic Party seems more like a guilt trip than a valid argument.  I think the lesser of evils seems like an argument to those who are with the party.  I'm not with the party, but I'm not the one who left.  The party left me, and distances itself farther every year.  I no longer have a sense of affiliation, and I don't have the energy or the interest to run along with them in their rush to their eventual self destruction.  I don't know, maybe America will eventually come together as unified conservative nation, and I wish us well, but I won't be sending anyone a campaign contribution to help that cause.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 09, 2020, 07:31:53 AM
Are you fighting for Biden now that Sanders has dropped out?
Yes.  I intend to.  I have already said as much.  I just resent the fact that Biden didn't win this on his own power (reportedly, Obama's intervention in getting virtually everyone else to drop out at just the right moment was pivotal) and almost no Biden supporter is talking policy or trying to meet liberals halfway on policy.

Instead, it's the worn-out lesser of two evils argument, which I have to warn you, has been losing effectiveness every year and is never going to win over people who don't already vote blue by default - and those are exactly the people we need.

Quote
If these are things you care about then I would urge you to consider the consequences of another four years of Republican control of the executive branch.
Hey, I'm not the one who just gave them a boost by giving them an easy target, an enthusiasm gap, and a limited appeal outside of the core base of "moderate" democrats.  Might as well given Trump the presidency on a silver platter.

A lot of people vote their convictions.  Not enough of them during the primary, evidently.  But people who care passionately about Medicare For All are going to ask you why they should support a candidate who doesn't support that.  You're going to have to come up with a much better argument than pointing out the obvious fact that Dems score better on abortion.

But as it turns out, I have been watching the candidates stances on global warming:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/09/climate/climate-change-biden.html

It's no Green New Deal, but cutting greehouse emissions by 2050 is an acceptable plan.  Sure beats the Drill, Baby, Drill that we've gotten with Trump.

Biden supporters really ought to consider leaning into stuff like this - actually talking policy instead of lesser of two evils arguments and attempting to shame liberals into compliance.  They'd win over a lot more people that way.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on April 09, 2020, 09:25:26 AM
I am just so.  Fucking.  Tired.  of politics in this country.  It used to be interesting, now it's just nauseating.  I'm tired of Republican fascism and their knuckledragger supporters lining up droolingly behind them without one functioning brain cell to call their own.  I'm tired of Democrats reliably forming a circular firing squad while their knuckledragger supporters scatter like a herd of cats on speed, so wrapped up in their personal agendas that their individual 'big pictures' measure one pixel wide and one pixel high.  I'm tired of news geared towards driving their owners' bottom line rather than actual journalism.

So.

Fucking.

Tired.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 09, 2020, 12:15:57 PM
And the good news keeps rolling in: Biden enters the general election about where Hillary Clinton did in 2016 (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/biden-enters-the-general-election-about-where-hillary-clinton-did-in-2016/ar-BB12l8sN)

I gotta say, those people who insist that Biden has "electability" had better be right.  Cause if they're wrong, they may have just screwed America into enduring Trump's disgusting reign for another four years.

Hillary had much more genuine negatives than Biden.  If Biden picks Kamala Harris, the Black community will vote more in 2020 than in 2016, and they will ignore that Harris' ancestry is from Jamaica, where some of her ancestors were slavers.  I would rather have the pseudo-Convention choose Gov Cuomo ... he seems effective.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 09, 2020, 12:18:02 PM
I honestly don't know. I feel like we are becoming one, but it's also based on our minority and youth population, both of which don't generally vote.

You have plenty of local candidates to support, particularly if you are in Austin.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 09, 2020, 12:26:19 PM
I am just so.  Fucking.  Tired.  of politics in this country.  It used to be interesting, now it's just nauseating.  I'm tired of Republican fascism and their knuckledragger supporters lining up droolingly behind them without one functioning brain cell to call their own.  I'm tired of Democrats reliably forming a circular firing squad while their knuckledragger supporters scatter like a herd of cats on speed, so wrapped up in their personal agendas that their individual 'big pictures' measure one pixel wide and one pixel high.  I'm tired of news geared towards driving their owners' bottom line rather than actual journalism.

So.

Fucking.

Tired.

Supporters like the Bundy family?

"MILITIA ANNOUNCES THAT COVID LOCKDOWN WILL NOT STOP EASTER WORSHIP, CONSTITUTION MUST BE DEFENDED" .. more 1980s fun in N Idaho from one of the Bundy family ;-(
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 09, 2020, 12:30:40 PM
I think people here are more pragmatic than in 2016.  Less Feminist hysteria ;-(  The Overton window has shifted in a good way for y'all ...

"The Overton window is the range of policies politically acceptable to the mainstream population at a given time. It is also known as the window of discourse."

I think y'all will get past the "vote for least bad" same as I did, eventually.  But you get there by having a more successful pre-election activity, starting the day after the election.  Get involved locally.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 10, 2020, 12:05:59 AM
Actually good news: Biden releases policy plans to expand Medicare, forgive student debt (https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/492063-biden-releases-plans-to-expand-medicare-forgive-student-debt)

Quote
Biden announced Thursday he would lower the Medicare eligibility age to 60 and forgive federal student debt for low-income and middle-class people who attended public colleges and universities, historically black colleges and universities (HBCU), and underfunded minority-serving institution (MSI).

The proposals mark an initial olive branch to supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), some of whom have expressed skepticism at Biden’s centrist brand of politics and were dismayed when the Vermont progressive withdrew from the race Wednesday. Biden specifically referenced Sanders’s advocacy for the two issues in a Medium post announcing his plans.

Quote
The former vice president has embraced Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-Mass.) student debt plan and Sanders’s idea to make public colleges and universities free for families whose income is below $125,000.
We partially have Sanders and Warren to thank for this, though it was nice of Biden to embrace this shift from the status quo.

This right here is how you win over people and build bridges: meet them halfway and fight for shared policy goals.  Keep news like this coming and it will be far easier to talk people into voting for Biden.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Draconic Aiur on April 10, 2020, 12:47:50 AM
"B,b,but he's a sex offender"
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 10, 2020, 12:59:38 AM
"B,b,but he's a sex offender"

You know, I was tempted to say that actually tempted me to vote for Biden, seeing him (and hopefully) the party recognize that it's progressive side needs to be listened to, but now I might just vote for Trump as a fuck you.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on April 10, 2020, 07:27:17 AM
With Donald Trump, sexual assault is no longer a political issue for Republicans, the Christian Right, or the Media.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 10, 2020, 12:27:12 PM
"B,b,but he's a sex offender"

Per most women about most men ... he is a sex offender (woman didn't reach orgasm).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 10, 2020, 12:28:05 PM
You know, I was tempted to say that actually tempted me to vote for Biden, seeing him (and hopefully) the party recognize that it's progressive side needs to be listened to, but now I might just vote for Trump as a fuck you.

Dems love their sex offenders, but President Harding (R) did it first ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 10, 2020, 12:29:26 PM
With Donald Trump, sexual assault is no longer a political issue for Republicans, the Christian Right, or the Media.

It shouldn't be an issue at all, just like robbery and murder.  I can respect a crime lord a lot better than a politician ;-)  Geraldine Ferraro could have been our first NYC Mafia connected VP.  If you don't think Donald Trump is Mafia, you don't know NYC.

I remember when anti-war was a policy of the Dems ... they change their mind ever 20 years or so.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 10, 2020, 05:01:00 PM
Quote
If you don't think Donald Trump is Mafia, you don't know NYC.

His mistake is working with the Bratva rather than the Cosa Nostra organizations.

Looks a lot worse on one's resumé. Unlike the Russians, Sicilians at least weren't recognized enemies of the State.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 10, 2020, 05:11:48 PM
"New Poll: Democrats Want To Ditch Joe Biden For Andrew Cuomo" ... polls can be trusted, right?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 10, 2020, 06:21:09 PM
I take back what I said; Biden's "new" Medical plan is a fucking joke.

The college is still a very good step in the right direction. I'll have to look up if he has any specifics for how it would be done now.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 10, 2020, 08:19:37 PM
I take back what I said; Biden's "new" Medical plan is a fucking joke.

The college is still a very good step in the right direction. I'll have to look up if he has any specifics for how it would be done now.

Past tense ... it was Obama's worst move, getting in bed with loansharks to expand opportunity to go to college ;-(.  Just make those loans dischargeable in bankruptcy (they aren't now).  That is just a trillion dollars if students can dump on the loansharks.  That is a one time thing.

Universal medical is much more money than that.  No sane person, under current circumstances, can promise free health care in the US.  In Rhode Island, maybe.  Try it there first.  Then expand out (RI coverage) if it works.  Not like Obama and ACA ... supposedly worked in Massachusetts, then let Congress make it into a monster and expand it to the other 49 states in one jump.  Medical subsidy is hugely expensive, and happens year on year.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 10, 2020, 08:50:22 PM
Governor Gavin Newsom (CA) has a Freudian slip?

"CALIFORNIA "DECLARES INDEPENDENCE" REFERRING TO CA AS "NATION STATE" ... click-bait, but Newsom did refer to his state as a nation-state.  Is he the next Rick Perry, former governor of Texas, who acted all Jefferson Davis a few years ago?  Hope not.  Civil War 2.0 is with nukes.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on April 10, 2020, 11:08:31 PM
I don't think it's a moral imperative to vote for Biden but I hope if progressives can't hold their noses and vote for him that they at least make their voices heard by writing in Sanders or their politician of choice. Better a protest vote than an apathy vote.

https://youtu.be/Fj2u4OWLzEY
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 11, 2020, 12:55:09 AM
I don't think it's a moral imperative to vote for Biden but I hope if progressives can't hold their noses and vote for him that they at least make their voices heard by writing in Sanders or their politician of choice. Better a protest vote than an apathy vote.
I briefly considered doing just that, but the thing is (and I'm sure a lot of other progressives feel the same way) I don't support Sanders exactly.  I'm sure he's a great guy.  A rare genuine person.  Nice, perhaps a bit too nice for his own good.  But I wasn't sticking my neck out for him just because I think he's a swell guy.  I supported him because I support having actually liberal policy positions (policy positions that would inevitably get watered down to barely center-left or even centrist positions in office.  Politics is the art of compromise, after all).

Writing him in does exactly nothing in advancing that cause.  Pointless, really.

On the other hand, Biden's apparent willingness to adopt some of Sanders' platform is a tiny step in the right direction.  Supporting him might support that cause a tiny amount.  This isn't ideal by any stretch (ideally, it should never have come to this), but it's a path.

If Biden can convincingly portray himself as an advocate for progressive causes, then he might have a chance.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on April 11, 2020, 04:28:44 AM
If Biden can convincingly portray himself as an advocate for progressive causes, then he might have a chance.

I think Biden needs to acknowledge that Americans had the best intentions electing Trump but now the question is "Has he delivered on his promises?" Are we in a better or worse place than we were four years ago? Are we more united or more divided? Are Americans working in decent jobs? Are we a wealthier country or are we $24 trillion in debt? Look around... did he made America great again? The Trump experiment failed and we need experienced leadership to get America back on course.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 11, 2020, 08:50:59 AM
I think Biden needs to acknowledge that Americans had the best intentions electing Trump
I think people forget that he ran on a populist, anti-corruption agenda.  Of course, he changed his tune real quick, not long after he got into office.  Forshame.

But even so, there's still a huge untapped base (right, left, and center) who is sick of the status quo, sick of the pervasive corruption, and wants major changes aimed at helping the working class.

If the candidates running spit in their eye (as Trump did) or take their support for granted (as Clinton did), then this base will not support them.

Lesser of two evils arguments will not win them over.  Shaming techniques will not win them over.  Only policy concessions will win them over.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 11, 2020, 10:16:26 AM
I briefly considered doing just that, but the thing is (and I'm sure a lot of other progressives feel the same way) I don't support Sanders exactly.  I'm sure he's a great guy.  A rare genuine person.  Nice, perhaps a bit too nice for his own good.  But I wasn't sticking my neck out for him just because I think he's a swell guy.  I supported him because I support having actually liberal policy positions (policy positions that would inevitably get watered down to barely center-left or even centrist positions in office.  Politics is the art of compromise, after all).

Writing him in does exactly nothing in advancing that cause.  Pointless, really.

On the other hand, Biden's apparent willingness to adopt some of Sanders' platform is a tiny step in the right direction.  Supporting him might support that cause a tiny amount.  This isn't ideal by any stretch (ideally, it should never have come to this), but it's a path.

If Biden can convincingly portray himself as an advocate for progressive causes, then he might have a chance.

The perfect is the enemy of the good enough.  A perfect candidate doesn't exist.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 13, 2020, 10:01:38 AM
"Believe All Women: Joe Biden's Sexual Assault Accuser Has Now Filed A Criminal Complaint" ... bwahah

"NYT Deletes Tweet, Stealth-Edits Article After Excusing Biden Sexual Misconduct" ... bwahah

They are all doing what that Feminist organization did about Biden ... only Republicans can be punished.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on April 13, 2020, 02:25:12 PM
Apparently Mark Cuban is another billionaire who is considering running for president as a third-party candidate.

From Wikipedia: "Cuban is an admirer of author and philosopher Ayn Rand."

Okay, that's really all I need to know.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 13, 2020, 02:26:40 PM
Apparently Mark Cuban is another billionaire who is considering running for president as a third-party candidate.

From Wikipedia: "Cuban is an admirer of author and philosopher Ayn Rand."

Okay, that's really all I need to know.
Heh, nothing makes one fall in love with Ayn Rand quite like a billion dollars.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on April 13, 2020, 03:29:41 PM
Bernie endorses Biden.

https://youtu.be/ZLHgP7g1mi0
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 13, 2020, 03:38:46 PM
I think Biden needs to acknowledge that Americans had the best intentions electing Trump but now the question is "Has he delivered on his promises?" Are we in a better or worse place than we were four years ago? Are we more united or more divided? Are Americans working in decent jobs? Are we a wealthier country or are we $24 trillion in debt? Look around... did he made America great again? The Trump experiment failed and we need experienced leadership to get America back on course.

Politicians usually betray their promises.  Except President Polk, who promised to make war on Mexico, to expand American territory.

This is a good reason for term limits.  How may times has Pelosi been reelected?  Oh yes, term limits, but only for the other party ;-)

Bernie endorses Biden?   That isn't much.  Same as his endorsing Hillary last time ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 13, 2020, 03:40:21 PM
Heh, nothing makes one fall in love with Ayn Rand quite like a billion dollars.


Ayn Rand was an an-cap.  With strong fascist tendencies.  But in the end, she used Medicare when she needed it ;-)  This was because she was a Russian emigre, after the Russian revolution, who admired "strong men".  So was rabidly anti-communist.  As a young woman she even fell in love with a convicted murderer in prison.  Sounds like an SJW to me ;-)

Yes, Bernie hopes to get money from Biden, he needs to get more money to interior decorate his 4th house he will be building, off of the "non-returnable" campaign funds ... like he did with his 3rd house, after the 2016 election.  Such a communist, he is ;-))  Corbyn in GB, who led the Labour Party, was twice as much a millionaire than Boris Johnson.  Grifters, all of them, going back to Karl Marx grifting off of Engels.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 14, 2020, 10:15:18 PM
"Obama endorses Biden for president" ... last Democrat, except Pocahontas, to do so ... only thing he has done post-presidency, and it is wrong.

"BLOOMBERG NEWS KILLED MAJOR NEWS STORY TO PROTECT CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY" ... wouldn't be political, except that Bloomberg is the moneybags for the DNC.  And Bloomberg made his billions off of the China trade.


Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 15, 2020, 01:59:31 PM
Interesting click bait ... brother of NY governor ...

CNN WAS JUST CAUGHT PUSHING FAKE NEWS, CUOMO PANICKING AFTER WITNESS CONFIRMS HE IS NOT ISOLATING ;-)  Talking heads should be kept in jars, per Futurama.

PS ...

"Chris Cuomo Calls His CNN Duties “Ridiculous” On Radio Show, Then Backtracks" ... the mask briefly drops.

Labour Party in GB released their anti-Semitism report.  It had content of many private conversations, where the infighting in that party was brutal over the entire tenure of Jeremy Corbyn as leader.  Basically the Blairites vs the Trots.  Brits use a lot of explicatives, even when discussing the boss of their own political party.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 15, 2020, 05:23:55 PM
"Elizabeth Warren Endorses Biden" ... Creepy Uncle/Pocahontas 2020?

"Pentagon IG Strikes Blow To Amazon, Rules $10B Award To Microsoft Was Proper" ... MS is a big supporter of China, and Gates is a big investor in coronaviruses.  Amazon is controlled by Dem activist Jeff Bezos and is a favorite of the CIA already.  This new "cloud" was for DoD, not CIA.

"Why Is Hunter Biden Still Listed As Board Member Of Chinese Company He Vowed To Resign From?" ... DNC is wholely owned subsidiary of CCP

"Air Force Deploys First Laser Weapon System Overseas" ... anti-drone weapon, so not quite a death ray.  President has conducted action in Iraq against Iranian backed militias, in Guam against Chinese provocation over Taiwan + N Korean missile provocation.  US has overflown Syria with F35s.  If Trump seeks to corner the market on sandwich bread, mustard and swiss cheese, expect Turkey to be threatened ;-) (what I had for lunch).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 17, 2020, 11:28:34 AM


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbq90xnV-o8
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 17, 2020, 12:48:52 PM
Bernie Bros surprised that Biden isn't Bernie.  Well as ancient White male fossils, they do look similar ;-)

"CBC Instructs Kids On How To Shut Down Their Parents' "Conspiracy Theories"" ... Canadian Broadcast Company.  Sub-Emperor Trudeau working hard to bring the benefits of the 1960s Chinese Cultural Revolution to Canada.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 18, 2020, 12:46:25 PM
Same in 2020 as in 2016 ...

“Look, the average Democrat voter is just plain stupid  They’re easy to manipulate.  That’s the easy part.” - Hillary Clinton, as told to Dick Morris in “Rewriting History”, 2005
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 21, 2020, 12:51:51 PM
"Joe Biden Would Pick Michelle Obama As Running Mate 'In A Heartbeat'" ... What?  Is Martha Washington not available?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 22, 2020, 05:06:48 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiSiHRNQlQo
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 22, 2020, 09:11:58 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiSiHRNQlQo

So you love Louis Farrakhan?  Elijah Muhammad?  Malcolm X was killed by his own, because he revealed that Nation of Islam was a heresy, after he went on Hajj with real Muslims.  Malcolm X had potential, if you read his writings.  That is why the Establishment didn't mind the internal "wet work".
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 23, 2020, 11:20:20 PM
"Top Elections Lawyer: Vote-By-Mail Is "The Most Massive Fraud Scheme In American History"" ... like last two elections, will there be more votes cast in a precinct than grand total of registered voters there?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 25, 2020, 05:53:23 AM
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/24/tara-reade-biden-video-207670 (https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/24/tara-reade-biden-video-207670)

Quote
A 1993 video has surfaced that appears to show the mother of Tara Reade, the former aide to Joe Biden who has accused him of sexual assault, talking about "problems" her daughter faced on CNN’s "Larry King Live."

As first reported by the Intercept, an unnamed woman from San Luis Obispo, California, called into King's show and said, "I’m wondering what a staffer would do besides go to the press in Washington? My daughter has just left there, after working for a prominent senator, and could not get through with her problems at all, and the only thing she could have done was go to the press, and she chose not to do it out of respect for him."


...

""She called him, I think, 'a prominent senator,'" Reade said in an interview last month. “She didn’t get into the assault, she got into the harassment. She said my daughter was sexually harassed by a very prominent senator, and then they retaliated and fired her.”"
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on April 25, 2020, 07:16:45 AM
The Democratic Central Committee surely knows about this stuff before they green-light their nominees.  Assault is not the same thing as a blow job from an intern.  Politically, I don't think it makes much difference to supporters, and the criminal justice system won't deal with it. The right wing will be rubbing their hands together in hypocritical glee, because the media will focus less on the many claims of Trump's own sexual assaults, as well as his mishandling of the Corona virus pandemic and his constant adolescent blathering on Twitter.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 25, 2020, 07:59:45 AM
The Democratic Central Committee surely knows about this stuff before they green-light their nominees.  Assault is not the same thing as a blow job from an intern.  Politically, I don't think it makes much difference to supporters, and the criminal justice system won't deal with it. The right wing will be rubbing their hands together in hypocritical glee, because the media will focus less on the many claims of Trump's own sexual assaults, as well as his mishandling of the Corona virus pandemic and his constant adolescent blathering on Twitter.

Unfortunately, I think you are right on every point.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 25, 2020, 09:49:52 AM
The Democratic Central Committee surely knows about this stuff before they green-light their nominees.  Assault is not the same thing as a blow job from an intern.  Politically, I don't think it makes much difference to supporters, and the criminal justice system won't deal with it. The right wing will be rubbing their hands together in hypocritical glee, because the media will focus less on the many claims of Trump's own sexual assaults, as well as his mishandling of the Corona virus pandemic and his constant adolescent blathering on Twitter.
Yep, the Trumpers get to excuse their guy because of the alleged misconduct of the Dem candidate.  And vice versa.  (Lesser of two evils argument)  It's a win-win for everybody.  Well, everybody without ethics.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 25, 2020, 10:02:09 AM
And while I'm on the subject:

Biden weaker in battleground states than Clinton (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/24/us/politics/biden-trump-swing-state-polls.html)

Biden weaker with young voters than Clinton (https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/16/politics/biden-young-voters/index.html)

Biden would get only about half of the latino vote (again, weaker than Clinton) (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/joe-biden-poll-half-latino-voters-president/)

Putting everything into electability only works if you're right.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 25, 2020, 10:38:55 AM
The Democratic Central Committee surely knows about this stuff before they green-light their nominees.  Assault is not the same thing as a blow job from an intern.  Politically, I don't think it makes much difference to supporters, and the criminal justice system won't deal with it. The right wing will be rubbing their hands together in hypocritical glee, because the media will focus less on the many claims of Trump's own sexual assaults, as well as his mishandling of the Corona virus pandemic and his constant adolescent blathering on Twitter.

"1993 CNN Clip Unearthed Of Biden Accuser's Mother Telling Larry King Of "Problems" With "Prominent Senator"" ... videotape and Internet are the enemies of all politicians.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 25, 2020, 10:39:47 AM
Yep, the Trumpers get to excuse their guy because of the alleged misconduct of the Dem candidate.  And vice versa.  (Lesser of two evils argument)  It's a win-win for everybody.  Well, everybody without ethics.

Human beings have no legality, no ethics, no morality.  Virtue is just signaling BS.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 25, 2020, 10:40:32 AM
And while I'm on the subject:

Biden weaker in battleground states than Clinton (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/24/us/politics/biden-trump-swing-state-polls.html)

Biden weaker with young voters than Clinton (https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/16/politics/biden-young-voters/index.html)

Biden would get only about half of the latino vote (again, weaker than Clinton) (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/joe-biden-poll-half-latino-voters-president/)

Putting everything into electability only works if you're right.

Still believe in polls?  Biden will be elected, if the CIA wants it.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on April 25, 2020, 11:40:38 AM
And while I'm on the subject:

Biden weaker in battleground states than Clinton (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/24/us/politics/biden-trump-swing-state-polls.html)

Biden weaker with young voters than Clinton (https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/16/politics/biden-young-voters/index.html)
Worse than Hillary?  Both Clinton and Biden ride the coattails of the Obama era of euphoria, both are experienced, and both offer pretty much the same political qualities, but neither have accomplished much in the way of forward vision.  They represent the status quo.  Neither is/was charismatic or inspiring.  They are old school. 

We blame the youth for not voting, but the party needs to at least take some of the blame for not inspiring.  Instead there seems to be some formula or algorithm being applied to selecting candidates that is heavily weighted on "Beating Trump," without offering  more.  "Not as bad as Trump" does little to boost confidence or get the disaffected to the polls.  And it does nothing at all to move us forward if they are ever installed in office.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 25, 2020, 04:45:29 PM
My biggest complaint against both major parties, is their craven incompetence!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 25, 2020, 11:14:19 PM
"1993 CNN Clip Unearthed Of Biden Accuser's Mother Telling Larry King Of "Problems" With "Prominent Senator"" ... videotape and Internet are the enemies of all politicians.

"CNN CAUGHT COVERING UP FOR JOE BIDEN??! OLD 1993 LARRY KING EPISODE WITH EVIDENCE DISAPPEARS" .. Biden isn't mumbling, he is fluent in New Speak.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on April 26, 2020, 04:12:06 AM
You know, y'all keep preaching your gospel of despair.  The rest of us have a country to reclaim, and whether it's by evolution rather than revolution, we're going to do it.  Bitching and moaning will accomplish fuck-all, adn if you genuinely believe there would be no difference whatsoever between a Biden presidency and four more years of the Oval Orifice, you're a fucking idiot, even stupider than the MAGA-hatted knuckledraggers.

I have a suggestion.  Get the fuck over yourselves and do what you can now, so we can do more next time.

Or, keep pissing and moaning and be both useless and meaningless.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 26, 2020, 08:55:38 AM
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/494475-progressive-groups-call-on-biden-to-remove-economic-advisor (https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/494475-progressive-groups-call-on-biden-to-remove-economic-advisor)

Apparently Larry Summers, who worked for the Clinton and Obama campaign, is one of Biden's economic advisors. Some of his key issues were giving the banks massive bailout loans without stipulations and supporting the XL-Keystone pipeline. He is also an ardent opponent to the idea that there should be a wealth tax on the most wealthy individuals.

Oh, that as well as suggesting that women are inherently bad at math and science and that's why they aren't well represented in STEM fields... or this gem of a quote...

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EWVMamYWAAA1QKW?format=jpg&name=large)

Birds of a feather flock together.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 26, 2020, 09:02:53 AM
You know, y'all keep preaching your gospel of despair.  The rest of us have a country to reclaim, and whether it's by evolution rather than revolution, we're going to do it.  Bitching and moaning will accomplish fuck-all, adn if you genuinely believe there would be no difference whatsoever between a Biden presidency and four more years of the Oval Orifice, you're a fucking idiot, even stupider than the MAGA-hatted knuckledraggers.

I have a suggestion.  Get the fuck over yourselves and do what you can now, so we can do more next time.

Or, keep pissing and moaning and be both useless and meaningless.

Normal people who are considering voting Democrat: "Biden is a deeply flawed candidate and we shouldn't ignore these issues because it will make it much harder for the Democrats to find support, something they desperately need if they want any realistic chance of beating Trump in the election. It would be nice to see Biden and/or the DNC address these issues rather than just repeat, 'Well at least he isn't Trump, so why are you complaining?' because that sets a terrible moral precedent, particularly when you are the party that runs on moral high-ground campaign and doubly so when you are the party of 'MeToo' and 'IBelieveWomen' and yet use the exact same arguments Republicans did against women like Ford."

Dems: "GO FUCK YOURSELF, YOU FUCKING RUSSIANS. YOU'RE FUCKING STUPIDER THAN TRUMP SUPPORTERS, YOU FUCKING MORONS. YOU JUST HATE AMERICA YOU WHINY LITTLE BITCHES, YOU ARE VOTING FOR TRUMP BECAUSE YOU HATE US! GET THE FUCK OVER YOURSELF!!!!!!"

Normal People: "Okay then... what policies does the Biden campaign have to address fundamental issues with America that existed long before Trump took office, such as wealth inequality, skyrocketing student debt, housing and commodity prices outpacing worker wages, corporations stripping worker rights and benefits, a large chunk of the population being unable to afford health care, climate change being an immediate issue..."

Dems: "GO FUCK YOURSELF HE ISN'T TRUMP ISN'T THAT GOOD ENOUGH? WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU KNUCKLEDRAGGERS JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP AND SUPPORT US, HONESTLY YOU PEOPLE ARE THE FUCKING WORSE FOR NOT JUST GETTING OVER YOURSELVES!"








Yeah, I think I know why Trump is going to have 4 more years in office at this rate.


Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 26, 2020, 09:33:34 AM
You know, y'all keep preaching your gospel of despair.
Oh, I'm sorry, were those facts not to your liking?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on April 26, 2020, 09:52:33 AM
I don't think 4 more years of Trump is a given, but if he loses, it will be of his own doing, not because of Biden.  I heard one pollster who predicted Trump's victory 4 years ago say that he would loose this year, no matter what candidate the Dems nominate.  But that was based on just one prediction from a new pollster on the scene who is batting 1000, based on getting 1 out of 1 prediction correct, and this is from 6 months ago.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 26, 2020, 10:05:28 AM
Larry Summers is one of the least regarded economists of the past 20 years.  He is a dupe as well was being a misogynist.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/09/the-comprehensive-case-against-larry-summers/279651/

Being a support for D administrations is as bad a recommendation as being a support for R administrations.  That is why as a true contrarian, I only support Centrist skeptical thinking.  Like Professor Steve Keen in GB (formerly Australia).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 26, 2020, 10:08:28 AM
You know, y'all keep preaching your gospel of despair.  The rest of us have a country to reclaim, and whether it's by evolution rather than revolution, we're going to do it.  Bitching and moaning will accomplish fuck-all, adn if you genuinely believe there would be no difference whatsoever between a Biden presidency and four more years of the Oval Orifice, you're a fucking idiot, even stupider than the MAGA-hatted knuckledraggers.

I have a suggestion.  Get the fuck over yourselves and do what you can now, so we can do more next time.

Or, keep pissing and moaning and be both useless and meaningless.

Evolution will do it.  But it takes a long time, and people are impatient (fueled by advertising of fake prosperity).  The end point of 20 more years of change, might not be to anyone's liking.  That is the myth of progress.  Change will come, but change don't give a damn about your D or R fantasies.  The past 20 years, and the 20 years before that, and the 20 years before that ... proves this.

Revolutions happen in failed societies (Czarist Russia).  Society collapses, and someone has to pick the pieces back up.  Stalin, Hitler, Mao.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 26, 2020, 10:15:55 AM
"Twitter CEO Unveils Feature To "Editorialize" Trump's Tweets As Election Looms" ... difference between a publisher and an aggregator.  Different laws apply, but YouTube and Twitter and Facebook act as publishers while claiming to be aggregators.  And as aggregators, they are stealing personal data for sale to the highest bidder.  I don't mind the days when there were two newspapers in town, a D-paper and an R-paper ... both of which only printed lies about The Other.  At least they weren't pretending to be fair and balanced.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 26, 2020, 11:12:17 AM
I don't think 4 more years of Trump is a given, but if he loses, it will be of his own doing, not because of Biden.  I heard one pollster who predicted Trump's victory 4 years ago say that he would loose this year, no matter what candidate the Dems nominate.  But that was based on just one prediction from a new pollster on the scene who is batting 1000, based on getting 1 out of 1 prediction correct, and this is from 6 months ago.

I don't know if I would say it's a given, but I certainly wouldn't put money on him losing.

That said,if the Democrats can at the very least make some real concessions to the center instead of the right, or nominate a progressive VP, then I think Biden actually does stand a chance of winning.

Unfortunately they don't seem to be doing the first, and my guess is the VP will be another dyed-in-the-wool party Dem. I hope he shocks me and proves me wrong, but I'm not going to hold my breath on that.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 26, 2020, 11:32:05 AM
I don't think 4 more years of Trump is a given, but if he loses, it will be of his own doing, not because of Biden.
He does have slightly less support lately (https://news.gallup.com/poll/308675/trump-job-rating-slides-satisfaction-tumbles.aspx).  (It's unclear how much of that was due to his supporters drinking bleach)  And we'll see if royally botching a deadly pandemic will hurt his poll numbers in the long term.  But yeah, this seems to be more about people not liking Trump than people liking Biden, which is a huge shame.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 26, 2020, 12:26:45 PM
I don't know if I would say it's a given, but I certainly wouldn't put money on him losing.

That said,if the Democrats can at the very least make some real concessions to the center instead of the right, or nominate a progressive VP, then I think Biden actually does stand a chance of winning.

Unfortunately they don't seem to be doing the first, and my guess is the VP will be another dyed-in-the-wool party Dem. I hope he shocks me and proves me wrong, but I'm not going to hold my breath on that.

Kamala Harris is another non-African-American (Jamaican descent instead of Kenyan descent) ... who has White ancestors who kept slaves, and who as prosecutor locked up known-innocent African-American men.  Not a liberal at all.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 26, 2020, 12:28:37 PM
He does have slightly less support lately (https://news.gallup.com/poll/308675/trump-job-rating-slides-satisfaction-tumbles.aspx).  (It's unclear how much of that was due to his supporters drinking bleach)  And we'll see if royally botching a deadly pandemic will hurt his poll numbers in the long term.  But yeah, this seems to be more about people not liking Trump than people liking Biden, which is a huge shame.

Only Dems drink bleach, and I wish more would ;-)  Low IQ tends to cluster in their party ;-))

It is a shame people don't like Biden?  Or a shame that the Primary system is a shambles (two elections in a row).  Are you attracted to Biden's leg hairs?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 26, 2020, 12:41:00 PM
Kamala Harris is another non-African-American (Jamaican descent instead of Kenyan descent) ... who has White ancestors who kept slaves, and who as prosecutor locked up known-innocent African-American men.  Not a liberal at all.

I'm still not sure if I think her or Biden were the worst possible choice. Her laughing during an interview about smoking pot while in college while also being a prosecutor who threw hundreds of people into jail for doing the same really rubbed me the wrong way.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 26, 2020, 12:57:04 PM
I'm still not sure if I think her or Biden were the worst possible choice. Her laughing during an interview about smoking pot while in college while also being a prosecutor who threw hundreds of people into jail for doing the same really rubbed me the wrong way.

There are much better but lesser known VP choices ... Stacey Abrams for example.  I would like to hear more about her.  Also Tulsi Gabbard ... just among the women potential VPs.  I doubt they will be chosen.  In spite of a broken Primary system (and broken for Republicans also in 2016) ... a good VP choice would help not hurt.  Not another Mr Potatoe-head.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 26, 2020, 01:23:58 PM
Gabbard was my original choice, so I would be happy with her. Of course she would never be nominated for VP since the party despises her view on the military industrial complex and foreign intervention...

I like Abrams, but all I really know about her is her anti-voter suppression policy and working class background.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 26, 2020, 03:18:10 PM
Gabbard was my original choice, so I would be happy with her. Of course she would never be nominated for VP since the party despises her view on the military industrial complex and foreign intervention...

I like Abrams, but all I really know about her is her anti-voter suppression policy and working class background.

Abrams has run for Georgia governor recently, so she has campaign experience.  A purely place-holder VP candidate, won't help with the practical stuff.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 26, 2020, 07:19:33 PM
"Peter Dauo, who worked for Clinton during her first presidential bid and was a prominent defender of her in the 2016 cycle, took to Twitter Saturday morning to say "Biden should withdraw."" ... shh ... don't say that until after he makes Hillary his VP running mate!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 26, 2020, 08:13:49 PM
I know at this point it's just beating a dead horse, but certain posts recently have given me the urge to keep beating that corpse anyways.


8:50 actually is a really on point... point as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6rd0qUpbQY
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on April 26, 2020, 10:15:14 PM
Yeah, I think I know why Trump is going to have 4 more years in office at this rate.
That's because people like you are more interested in Biden's flaws than in the Oval Orifice's.  Oh, wah, the Democratic candidate wasn't your first choice, whine whine bitch moan complain, yes, we get it.  Tough shit.  He's not mine either, you get no sympathy from me.  Unlike you, I have priorities beyond getting my first choice.

No one ever said Biden wasn't a flawed candidate.  No one ever said he was perfect.  You're the one who's obsessed on that point, not me.

Your priorities are well intended in principle, but completely fucked up in practice.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 26, 2020, 10:22:46 PM
No one ever said Biden wasn't a flawed candidate.  No one ever said he was perfect.  You're the one who's obsessed on that point, not me.
Waiit...a perfect candidate is an option?  Or did Shiranu advocate for voting for only perfect candidates?

Cause if not, you're attacking a strawman.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 26, 2020, 10:44:30 PM
Waiit...a perfect candidate is an option?  Or did Shiranu advocate for only voting for perfect candidates?

Cause if not, you're attacking a strawman.

If the ends justify the means (aka access to the WH by any means) then I think the aliens from Independence Day should destroy it now.  A reasonable candidate isn't demanding much.  This is all psyop  theater by the CIA/FBI .. and you are all being taken in by it.  What is shocking is that 2016-2020 is such an obviously absurd narrative, the CIA guy who wrote it should be fired.  When Hollywood laid off all those writers during the writer's strike, apparently CIA only hired the hacks.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 27, 2020, 08:15:39 AM
Quote
That's because people like you are more interested in Biden's flaws than in the Oval Orifice's.

I've been calling out Trump's flaws for 5 years now, from just about the day he announced his bid for the presidency. I've been in more arguments with people here over Trump's horrible behaviour and started more threads about the shitty policies he has proposed or implemented than there are pages in this thread, so please... spare me that bullshit.

Quote
No one ever said Biden wasn't a flawed candidate.  No one ever said he was perfect.

No, but anyone who dares to point out that his voting record does not indicate he will be any more progressive than your run-of-the-mill Republican, that he has a long of history of racist remarks and opposed desegregation, that he has a history of harassing women, that we just want one good reason to vote for him other than, "He isn't Trump!"... what happens?

You don't address those issues, instead you instantly resort to calling the people bringing those issues up knuckle-dragging Trump supporters. You throw a self-righteous hissy fit that we won't just bootlick the candidate nominated by a party that has bent over backwards to appease conservatives who strip worker rights, throw us into debt and deny us healthcare.

And Biden isn't a "flawed" candidate. A flawed candidate is an old man who makes stupid gafts, who rambles on without making a point, who holds some policies that aren't great but are at least tolerable.

If your idea of a "flawed, but okay" candidate is someone who has a history of sexually harassing women, who has made multiple racist remarks about African Americans and SE Asians, who opposed desegregation, who mocks progressives to their face when questioned on his policy, who says he would veto medicare for all even if it was Dems who proposed it, who takes economic advice from a man who thinks inequality is just people being treated the way they deserve and that women are inherently too stupid to do math or science... that says far more about you than it does anything else, and frankly explains why the best you can offer is, "He isn't Trump, fuckface!".

If that's what you really think the Democratic party is suppose to be, then fuck you and fuck off. You can have your stupid ass party all to yourself, and I hope you enjoy getting your ass kicked in the election when YOU allow Donald J. Trump to be reelected.


I mean shit, there is actually still a decent chance of me voting for Biden despite ALL that if I think there is a chance he can win in my state. But that doesn't mean I'm not going to call him on his b.s. when it comes up.


This is clearly going nowhere and frankly I'm getting tired of the personal attacks. If you want to continue to respond, go ahead, but all you will be met with is mocking rather than responses. You get what you give.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 27, 2020, 11:23:28 AM
News from the money-source for the DNC this year ...

"Bloomberg published a stunning piece on April 9th promoting the secession of California from the U.S., in an op-ed by Francis Wilkinson titled “Gavin Newsom Declared California a “Nation-State”, which resurrected John C. Calhoun in a neo-confederate argument favoring nullification."

Dems gotta do what they always do ... and about LBJ's N-word Plantation (aka welfare designed to destroy Black families) ...

"Here's "Polyamory": Multi-Partner Sexual-Rights Crusade On The Horizon" ... will Dems propose Mormonism as their official religion?

Extended quote from the Bernie Bros ...

"Anis Sivani 9/11/2019 Bernie Sanders Campaign"

"The upcoming third debate is a crucial moment to reset impressions. It will be the first time all the leading candidates will be on stage together, providing new opportunities for joint interaction. After this debate, significant changes in image will become more difficult to accomplish. Therefore, this debate is key to begin altering some counterproductive perceptions that have set in: 1) Warren and Sanders are indistinguishable on policy; 2) Warren is an acceptable alternative to Sanders; 3) Any Democratic nominee is good enough, because at least they’re not Trump, and at least we’ll be resetting to the Obama years. 4) Trump can be beaten easily, he’s ready to be had (since Hillary already won the last popular vote); and 5) All the Democrats are more or less on the same side, their idealism comes from the same roots, so there is no urgency for any big philosophical issues to be worked out."

Dems being counterproductive?  Never happened before ...

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on April 27, 2020, 02:26:58 PM
And Biden isn't a "flawed" candidate. A flawed candidate is an old man who makes stupid gafts, who rambles on without making a point, who holds some policies that aren't great but are at least tolerable.

If your idea of a "flawed, but okay" candidate is someone who has a history of sexually harassing women, who has made multiple racist remarks about African Americans and SE Asians, who opposed desegregation, who mocks progressives to their face when questioned on his policy, who says he would veto medicare for all even if it was Dems who proposed it, who takes economic advice from a man who thinks inequality is just people being treated the way they deserve and that women are inherently too stupid to do math or science... that says far more about you than it does anything else, and frankly explains why the best you can offer is, "He isn't Trump, fuckface!".

If that's what you really think the Democratic party is suppose to be, then fuck you and fuck off. You can have your stupid ass party all to yourself, and I hope you enjoy getting your ass kicked in the election when YOU allow Donald J. Trump to be reelected.


I mean shit, there is actually still a decent chance of me voting for Biden despite ALL that if I think there is a chance he can win in my state. But that doesn't mean I'm not going to call him on his b.s. when it comes up.


This is clearly going nowhere and frankly I'm getting tired of the personal attacks. If you want to continue to respond, go ahead, but all you will be met with is mocking rather than responses. You get what you give.
As I quite clearly admitted earlier in this very thread, the only policy reason I give a fuck about is getting rid of Trump (http://atheistforums.com/index.php?topic=13754.msg1277932#msg1277932).

If you could have been bothered to read what I had written, you would know that a) I am not particularly pleased with Biden being the nominee either, but that's the reality that we're stuck with; and b) yes, I am going to make my personal stand on the hill that four more years of Trump is an existential threat to the Republic because that's the one I have left now.  However disappointing a Biden presidency may be, it cannot conceivably be more damaging and more just plain evil than a second Trump term.

Whether or not that's enough for you, I have no control over.  I'm not going to argue that we could have chosen any number of better candidates because obviously we could have (I can think of at least four I was planning on voting for, who dropped out), but the current reality is what it is.

We get it, you're not happy.  Neither am I, especially.  But what the fuck else am I supposed to do in November, just stay home and pretend it's not worth it?  I happen to care enough about my country that 'less bad' is preferable to 'demonstrably awful', and a small step forward (or even just stopping going in the wrong direction) is preferable to a headlong dive off a cliff.  Wailing about it solves nothing.  If you can't get excited about Biden, fine—he's not exciting, I admit that.

But I'm still turning out and voting this fall—if by some mischance Trump is re-elected, you can't blame me.

If you can't do that, fine, do something useful and throw your energy and your anger into a progressive Congressional or Senatorial candidate, for your governor and state rep and state senator, for your mayor and councilmembers.  A progressive political infrastructure is the prerequisite for actually getting the progressive agenda enacted, and we don't have that right now.

If you want to blame someone, blame the ones who didn't (and don't) bother turning out.  And if you're going to keep preaching despair, you can only serve to raise that number.  You want to point a finger, look in a mirror.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 27, 2020, 08:21:29 PM
""This Happened": Biden Accuser's Sexual Assault Claim Corroborated By Two More Witnesses" ... so who will Hillary liquidate now, given they tried to hide her mother's testimony?

"Pelosi Pitches Universal Basic Income To Cope With Pandemic" ... the DNC could have supported Yang, back last year, but Goldman-Sachs, backer of Hillary, wouldn't have liked that.

"AG Barr Sics Federal Prosecutors On States With 'Unconstitutional' Lockdowns" ... governors decide when and if and how ... but the Feds can circumscribe that.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 28, 2020, 05:02:53 PM
This video actually criticizes leftists like Bernie and AOC using some very lose definitions and sketchy logic, but starting around 7:40 Pool absolutely sums up my issue with the American system of running things better than anyone else I have seen by explaining how a progressive tax tier would help.

All systems are destined to fail as power creeps into the hands of the few rather than the many, but what we can try to do is slow down that failure for as long as possible. Unfortunately that's not happening, and in truth we are currently going in a direction that expedites the failure of the system.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2s1CMh1r1A
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 28, 2020, 09:38:37 PM
https://medium.com/@michele.delangeavl/peace-and-pandemic-a8898219395d (https://medium.com/@michele.delangeavl/peace-and-pandemic-a8898219395d)

Quote
Like him or loath him, Trump’s election indicates the old game and the old narratives aren’t the only option. Trump bullied his way to the table in 2016. The status quo didn’t want him to play, but he forced his hand. Supporters believed Trump was a game-changer- that he’d drain the government swamp and bring great changes to benefit Americans. He changed the players, but not the game, Trump simply added an expansion pack to the old one.

Trump is a charismatic opportunist who watched key government players for years and figured out that the rules aren’t followed by either side. Because an overwhelming number of political players cheat, Trump goes unchecked. Trump gambled no one would risk personal exposure to get in his way. So far, he’s been right. He’s winning because the establishment always wins- he wove his way into it. Trump mastered the rotten game and it angers Democrats.

...

Looking back on the past year of primary is frustrating but important for understanding how the DNC operates, the damage it does to our democracy and why Gabbard worked hard to raise awareness. It doesn’t take leaked emails to reveal Biden isn’t the best of the 29 candidates who ran in 2020.The fact that all roads brought us to Joe Biden makes sense when we understand the DNC chooses the Democratic nominee, not the voters.

As I said before, Gabbard was my first choice pick; even above Bernie.

I didn't realise until now that the concentrated DNC efforts to discredit her, to call her a "Russian asset", to change the rules so that even though she qualified she wasn't allowed to debate (and then the debates suddenly stopped talking about foreign policy, funny how that worked) wasn't just because of her anti-war stance. It was because she resigned as Vice Chair of the DNC because of the corruption within the party and it's efforts to make sure the voters didn't actually have a voice or a choice.



This was from 3 years ago, but if anything has changed... it has only changed for the worse.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFCahqSnvvY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFCahqSnvvY)


Quote


We’re a nation of good people conditioned for war and convinced our well-being is reflected by a healthy stock market and economy. We leave out of the wellness equation our increased problems of addiction, homelessness, mass shootings, mental illness, poverty and suicide. The president told us the economy was booming and that America is great again. We weren’t convinced, but we didn’t ask too many questions. We wanted to believe. We were distracted.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 28, 2020, 10:06:05 PM
"'Infodemic': Seoul Takes Aim At CNN "Fake News" Report About Kim Jong Un's Failed Heart Surgery" ... Even Korea calls out CNN for fake news.

"Chinagate Is The New Russiagate... And Is Far More Dangerous" ... Chinagate is real, and bipartisan.  Ukrainegate was real, but only Dems (because it happened under a Dem administration).  Russiagate never happened, it was neocon BS.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 28, 2020, 10:12:50 PM

Really been impressed with the Green's candidate on everything I've seen.

I might take trdsf's advice and vote for him, since it's really more about giving the Green's a chance at winning local elections rather than a serious bid for the presidency.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PR94A5dR5E
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 28, 2020, 10:16:39 PM
Libertarian party, not working toward local elections (except in Alaska) is what has kept them off the radar.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 28, 2020, 10:29:24 PM
Libertarian party, not working toward local elections (except in Alaska) is what has kept them off the radar.

I haven't slept alot... are you saying the libertarian party + not working towards local kept the Greens off the radar or that the Libertarian party hasn't worked towards local elections?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 29, 2020, 01:43:48 AM
(https://preview.redd.it/1ouaca72hkv41.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=890b8630027f3d95d8e02e0802edc8e8848698a6)

Me:  Well, let's just stick to stuff we know works from other countries currently doing it.

Centrists:  Sounds insanely and totally radical.  Also, might be apocalyptic.

Me:  ???
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on April 29, 2020, 08:14:15 AM
This video actually criticizes leftists like Bernie and AOC using some very lose definitions and sketchy logic, but starting around 7:40 Pool absolutely sums up my issue with the American system of running things better than anyone else I have seen by explaining how a progressive tax tier would help.

All systems are destined to fail as power creeps into the hands of the few rather than the many, but what we can try to do is slow down that failure for as long as possible. Unfortunately that's not happening, and in truth we are currently going in a direction that expedites the failure of the system.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2s1CMh1r1A

I'm generally on the same page as Tim Pool and I become frustrated when people like Rogan start framing the problem in a capitalist/socialist dichotomy. Rogan considers universal healthcare "socialism" but from my perspective healthcare should have never been the responsibility of corporations any more than law enforcement, national defense or education. I don't think the purpose of government should be to ensure economic equity but to maximize the freedom of individuals. Part of the responsibility of government is to put restrictions on corporations and wealthy individuals so they can't rig the system in their favor, exploit people or destroy the environment. I agree with progressive taxation but don't have a problem with people being rich, I don't agree with AOC that "every billionaire is a policy failure." I have a problem with how billionaires and corporations can influence government policy and the justice system for their own interests. The blame doesn't entirely lie with the wealthy individual or corporation but with a government that allows these entities to get away with self-serving actions. A libertarian will disagree and it may sound paradoxical but I believe to maximize the freedom of individuals, the government needs to set limits. For example, the wealthy have far too much power to influence elections (e.g. Bloomberg). A roadblock would to amend the Constitution to limit campaign spending or enact something like Andrew Yang's Democracy Dollars. (https://www.yang2020.com/policies/democracydollars/)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 29, 2020, 09:48:07 AM
I agree with progressive taxation but don't have a problem with people being rich, I don't agree with AOC that "every billionaire is a policy failure." I have a problem with how billionaires and corporations can influence government policy and the justice system for their own interests.
Imho, AOC probably fully agrees with that as well as nearly everyone in the "eat the rich" camp.  It's not like we have it out for wealthy people on an individual basis - it's that being rich enough to buy senators and judges - being rich enough to buy policy - is far too much power for individuals to have.  We can't expect people to always be benevolent with unchecked power - there's simply too much temptation to use it selfishly.

Also, we have to ask ourselves how much inequality we're willing to tolerate as a society.  I consider myself pretty solidly on the left, and frankly, I would tolerate quite a bit.  Not everyone has the same education, ability, and opportunity, so of course some people are going to be richer than others.  Some people are going to have nice houses and some people are going to have much more modest houses.  That's fine.  What is not fine is people having multiple mansions and yachts and private jets while others die in the street.  That's a cruel and horrific system.  And I think that if you sit down with most people and show them the true extent of the situation (https://equitablegrowth.org/eight-graphs-that-tell-the-story-of-u-s-economic-inequality/), most people will acknowledge that there's a problem.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 29, 2020, 10:48:45 AM
I haven't slept alot... are you saying the libertarian party + not working towards local kept the Greens off the radar or that the Libertarian party hasn't worked towards local elections?

Used them as an negative example, to reinforce your point regarding competing in local elections.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 29, 2020, 10:49:27 AM
(https://preview.redd.it/1ouaca72hkv41.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=890b8630027f3d95d8e02e0802edc8e8848698a6)

Me:  Well, let's just stick to stuff we know works from other countries currently doing it.

Centrists:  Sounds insanely and totally radical.  Also, might be apocalyptic.

Me:  ???

Chinese Communism works.  Thanks Emperor Xi ;-)  So when we all become Chinese communists, who will remain to buy our cheap shit?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 29, 2020, 10:51:11 AM
Imho, AOC probably fully agrees with that as well as nearly everyone in the "eat the rich" camp.  It's not like we have it out for wealthy people on an individual basis - it's that being rich enough to buy senators and judges - being rich enough to buy policy - is far too much power for individuals to have.  We can't expect people to always be benevolent with unchecked power - there's simply too much temptation to use it selfishly.

Also, we have to ask ourselves how much inequality we're willing to tolerate as a society.  I consider myself pretty solidly on the left, and frankly, I would tolerate quite a bit.  Not everyone has the same education, ability, and opportunity, so of course some people are going to be richer than others.  Some people are going to have nice houses and some people are going to have much more modest houses.  That's fine.  What is not fine is people having multiple mansions and yachts and private jets while others die in the street.  That's a cruel and horrific system.  And I think that if you sit down with most people and show them the true extent of the situation (https://equitablegrowth.org/eight-graphs-that-tell-the-story-of-u-s-economic-inequality/), most people will acknowledge that there's a problem.

This is why, letting people in the 3rd world, see a fictional US/Europe on TV, was suicide on our part.  Per Somalis you are middle class, so you are what's for dinner.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on April 29, 2020, 12:18:52 PM
Quote
I agree with progressive taxation but don't have a problem with people being rich, I don't agree with AOC that "every billionaire is a policy failure."

I agreed with everything else you said, but I will respond to this...

I personally think a billionaire is an example of policy failure, because there is literally no way you can become a billionaire without major exploitation of people beneath you. A little "exploitation" is a necessity for any business, that's just the nature of business... but when an individual is making that type of money, the only way that is possible is by exploiting their workers, exploiting their clients and exploiting flaws in paying your due share as well as often times finding foreign countries to use slave labour.

Not only that, but when individuals have more wealth than small nations... they have to therefor have a disproportionate amount of power in their society.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on April 29, 2020, 12:55:19 PM
I personally think a billionaire is an example of policy failure, because there is literally no way you can become a billionaire without major exploitation of people beneath you. A little "exploitation" is a necessity for any business, that's just the nature of business... but when an individual is making that type of money, the only way that is possible is by exploiting their workers, exploiting their clients and exploiting flaws in paying your due share as well as often times finding foreign countries to use slave labour.

I guess it depends on what is considered exploitation. J.K. Rowling's net worth is $1 billion. Did she get that by exploiting people? I don't know.

Not only that, but when individuals have more wealth than small nations... they have to therefor have a disproportionate amount of power in their society.

Agreed. I think that is why governments need to limit the influence of wealthy individuals and corporations. The Walton family has clearly been allowed to game the system to the detriment of almost all involved. The way state governments and municipalities were openly bribing Amazon to get their second headquarters is another example of the problem. We need a government that is going to protect its citizens but the people we have in office are prime offenders.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 29, 2020, 01:06:15 PM
Not only that, but when individuals have more wealth than small nations... they have to therefor have a disproportionate amount of power in their society.
Right.  Combined with the policy that money = speech (two guesses for who lobbied for that) and you have a disproportionate squared influence, seriously undermining our (ostensible) previous policy of "one man, one vote".
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 29, 2020, 01:10:06 PM
I agreed with everything else you said, but I will respond to this...

I personally think a billionaire is an example of policy failure, because there is literally no way you can become a billionaire without major exploitation of people beneath you. A little "exploitation" is a necessity for any business, that's just the nature of business... but when an individual is making that type of money, the only way that is possible is by exploiting their workers, exploiting their clients and exploiting flaws in paying your due share as well as often times finding foreign countries to use slave labour.

Not only that, but when individuals have more wealth than small nations... they have to therefor have a disproportionate amount of power in their society.

Billionaires aren't natural.  They are the product of democratic government approved oligopoly and monopoly, and corrupt politicians on the take.  Of course such private power, a modern equivalent of the old aristocracy, is corrupt as shit.  The Rothschilds, from 1694 founding of the Bank of England (first central bank) and their fellow travelers in the (King William and Queen Mary) Dutch takeover of the British Empire in 1688 (anti-Catholic Glorious Revolution) ... have continued in power, with increasing power, and spreading central banks all over the world, which owe their prosperity to the Bank of England.  Only enemies of GB, like Russia, India, Iran and China have stayed out.  See Bank of the United States (twice) and the Federal Reserve.  The Federal Reserve was created in 1913, as a partner of the Bank of England, to fund the anticipated WW I.  As it was, the Bank of England nearly went bankrupt over WW I.  Without US funding and support, the British Empire would have had to drop out of WW I, in 1917 at the latest.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xoz4jbEZzlc

If you don't take the long view, and the world-wide view, then you are lost in the trees.

The Panic of 1908 (which speculators profited from, just like in 2008) was underwritten by J P Morgan.  As the country got bigger, it was clear that a trust/combine of billionaires would be necessary to underwrite the nation's economy.  With anti-trust action by the Federal Government, you couldn't rely on John D Rockefeller or Andrew Carnegie for example, to control industry, as J P Morgan controlled finance.  So a Trust was formed to counter anti-Trust, and politicians like Taft and Wilson were bought, and Teddy Roosevelt defeated.  Today even bigger swings in the economy occur, for example the self inflicted wound of pandemic shutdown (but not Sweden).  The Fed, rather than a cabal of billionaires, provide the insurance for the financial and banking industry.  Mostly as liquidity, not as cash.  And liquidity not only keeps the money velocity up, but also can be used as collateral for other loans.  Of course the Bank of England and the Fed are private corporations, not government agencies.  So the billionaires still control, but indirectly.  Trump is a threat because he is a rogue elephant property developer.  He has benefited from modern finance, but he doesn't sit in the secret society meetings like the Bilderbergers, Davos etc.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 29, 2020, 01:10:52 PM
Right.  Combined with the policy that money = speech (two guesses for who lobbied for that) and you have a disproportionate squared influence, seriously undermining our (ostensible) previous policy of "one man, one vote".

Government policies always have ironic names, even SCOTUS decisions.  That one was "Citizen's United" ... it can be overturned by Congress, but Congress is completely corrupt.  J K Rowling was assisted because her early books were required reading in all schools.  Who runs schools?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 29, 2020, 05:19:14 PM
Hillary endorses Biden ... no surprised ... she is a monster like Biden.

Stacey Abrams endorses Biden ... surprised!  Seems all Dem women will fuck anyone to be VP ;-(
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on April 29, 2020, 11:47:29 PM
Hillary endorses Biden ... no surprised ... she is a monster like Biden.

A new poll of Bernie supporters reveals 1 in 4 say they will not be voting for Biden. Progressives and conservatives are attacking Biden from both sides. Americans appear dispirited due to the pandemic and associated economic meltdown and none of the Democrats, neither Biden or Bernie, are inspiring confidence. I think these rape allegations are going to affect Biden in a way they would not affect Trump-- do Democrats "believe all women" or not? Currently, Trump's campaign has $98.5 million on hand compared to Biden’s $26.4 million and I suspect that people who currently have money, the wealthy, will fund Trump because he represents their financial interests. Polls currently favor Biden but they also favored Clinton back in 2016, so we shall see.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on April 30, 2020, 12:07:51 AM
Currently, Trump's campaign has $98.5 million on hand compared to Biden’s $26.4 million and I suspect that people who currently have money, the wealthy, will fund Trump because he represents their financial interests.
I wouldn't put it past them.  That strategy certainly worked in the primary (https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelatindera/2020/02/18/here-are-the-billionaires-funding-the-democratic-presidential-candidates/#4aa1268833f7).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on April 30, 2020, 03:21:01 AM
Rogan considers universal healthcare "socialism" but from my perspective healthcare should have never been the responsibility of corporations any more than law enforcement, national defense or education.
It's my understanding that healthcare became a thing offered with your job during World War II when there were wage controls, so businesses started offering medical coverage when they couldn't offer higher wages.  Unfortunately, it got ingrained in the system.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: drunkenshoe on April 30, 2020, 05:10:14 AM
Do you guys think Covid-19 crisis will harm Mr. Teflon? Or will he stay?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Mike Cl on April 30, 2020, 08:49:36 AM
Do you guys think Covid-19 crisis will harm Mr. Teflon? Or will he stay?
He will stay.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on April 30, 2020, 08:58:24 AM
Do you guys think Covid-19 crisis will harm Mr. Teflon? Or will he stay?

I have no idea. He isn't held to the same standards as other politicians. He's laying the groundwork to spin the pandemic crisis to his advantage by instructing the media to connect Wuhan labs to COVID-19 so he has a scapegoat, writing his name on stimulus checks, framing Democrats as using this crisis for their own ends, etc. He hasn't even really started attacking Biden yet. I'm expecting Trump to be re-elected and will be pleasantly surprised if he loses, although we will never hear the end of it.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 30, 2020, 11:59:12 AM
I wouldn't put it past them.  That strategy certainly worked in the primary (https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelatindera/2020/02/18/here-are-the-billionaires-funding-the-democratic-presidential-candidates/#4aa1268833f7).

The Koch brothers have funded Democrats.  There are other wealthy people who do.  The wealthy are not monolithic.  FDR was very wealthy, and very liberal.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelatindera/2020/02/18/here-are-the-billionaires-funding-the-democratic-presidential-candidates/#113ef3b233f7

What you are saying is, billionaires didn't back Bernie ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 30, 2020, 12:03:43 PM
I have no idea. He isn't held to the same standards as other politicians. He's laying the groundwork to spin the pandemic crisis to his advantage by instructing the media to connect Wuhan labs to COVID-19 so he has a scapegoat, writing his name on stimulus checks, framing Democrats as using this crisis for their own ends, etc. He hasn't even really started attacking Biden yet. I'm expecting Trump to be re-elected and will be pleasantly surprised if he loses, although we will never hear the end of it.

China did nothing wrong!  Enemies of China are running dogs of capitalism!

Everyone is attacking Biden except the women who want to be VP.  I think the Dem primary system was laughable.  That and the vampire grip of the Clintons on the DNC.  The convention and election can only be tragedies given those self inflicted wounds.  Covid is a wild card.  Yes, all politicians should be held accountable for their countless crimes (I am serious).  The Dems partly got the party platform enacted as part of the stimulus package (Pelosi had to be thrown a bone).  If this was 2010, Dems could have gotten all of it.  But having unilateral power can backfire as ACA did.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 30, 2020, 12:06:52 PM
Do you guys think Covid-19 crisis will harm Mr. Teflon? Or will he stay?

50/50.  I expect total failure of civilization thru depression and world war.  The election is unimportant compared to that.  Apocalyptic dystopia was planned in, by the Chinese and the Western Elite who work with them.  Can you work as a maid or secretary?  Those will be the only jobs open to women in the World of the Future (Future House in Disneyland circa 1960).  Men can get jobs as butlers, pool boys and chauffeurs.  The Elite of today are no more sane than in France 1788.  By definition, even if they aren't addicted to expansive drugs (I wonder how predominant opium was in Paris) ... they lead lives disconnected from reality (like academics).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk2YBA_oa1A

Brought to you by the company that dominates GMO foods ;-(
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on April 30, 2020, 01:02:54 PM
"CNN'S DON LEMON ACTUALLY CALLS OUT BIDEN DOUBLE STANDARD, CALLS OUT STACEY ABRAMS OVER BIDEN SUPPO.." ... Don Lemon is my daughter's favorite political comic.  The worm turns ...

"EVEN THE ATLANTIC ENCOURAGES BIDEN TO RELEASE HIS SEALED SENATE RECORDS" ... officially and conveniently sealed until two years after he leaves all public office.

Will Justian Amash, Michigan Congressman, former Repub, also become a former Dem by becoming the Libertarian candidate in November?  The Libertarians will be on the ballot in 35 states.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on May 01, 2020, 08:50:53 AM
I have no idea. He isn't held to the same standards as other politicians. He's laying the groundwork to spin the pandemic crisis to his advantage by instructing the media to connect Wuhan labs to COVID-19 so he has a scapegoat, writing his name on stimulus checks, framing Democrats as using this crisis for their own ends, etc. He hasn't even really started attacking Biden yet. I'm expecting Trump to be re-elected and will be pleasantly surprised if he loses, although we will never hear the end of it.
Keep in mind the margin by which he lost the vote in '16, though, and the tiny margins by which he carried traditional 'blue wall' states that let him slip through the Constitutional loophole.  You also had a lot of people thinking four years ago, 'well, hell, what could it hurt to go outside the system?'

Now they know.

Also, I found this telling -- he threatened to sue his campaign manager for bringing him bad poll numbers (https://www.chicagotribune.com/election-2020/ct-trump-polling-anger-election-campaign-20200430-7dfwrjyax5ecfefnmjfp6go2jm-story.html).  More and more, they can only report to him if they bring him good news (or more likely, find an outlier poll they can lean on).

That raises an interesting prospect, and one I can easily see happening -- the Oval Orifice suing his campaign staff for losing the election this fall.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 01, 2020, 10:45:10 AM
People think they can get into the "mind" of Trump, while having said he is stupid or insane.  What does that say about you? ;-)

"Biden Bumbles Over Tara Reade Answers During Tense MSNBC Interview" ... with Mika Brzezinski, daughter of Felix, who is Kissinger's protege.  Doesn't get more Deep State than that.  Clearly CIA/FBI support Biden (who probably was only carrying out CIA/FBI "criminal" work in Ukraine/China/Iraq etc).  It was the NY FBI office that put pressure on Comey, to re-review the mail server/Weiner laptop the week before the election, which turned the election around.  NY FBI reportedly was disgusted by what was on the Weiner laptop, which is still secret.  It was a very near thing in 2016, Deep State-wise.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 01, 2020, 12:08:48 PM
"THE DEMOCRATS SCRAMBLE TO PROTECT JOE BIDEN BY ESSENTIALLY CANCELLING THE US ELECTION" ... they wanted to do this in 1860.  How Republicans negotiate with Democrats ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSS5SscrLoU
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on May 01, 2020, 12:16:41 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9p5CXMVGMxU
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on May 01, 2020, 12:22:25 PM
Thankfully, that was the only time his memory was a bit hazy.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 01, 2020, 12:34:49 PM
Thankfully, that was the only time his memory was a bit hazy.

If you like paying 25% interest on your credit cards, thank Delaware Biden, the state that most supports corrupt corporations.

If Covid stops the Dem convention in Milwaukee, move it to Beijing, because they have Covid under control there ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mE-QsIAta_8
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on May 01, 2020, 12:37:22 PM
Thankfully, that was the only time his memory was a bit hazy.

Literally the only thing I can think of at this point is the Dems want to lose because Trump has been a massive boon for their fundraising. Keeping the #VoteBlueNoMatterWho crowd riled up and angry means more people throwing their money at the party thinking they will fix things and get the dumbass out of the White House.

It's either massive money or massive egos that are making the Democrats do everything in their power to lose this election, or maybe both. But there is no way the Dems are actually taking this election seriously, I refuse to believe that given literally every step the party has taken has been the worst possible step they could take.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Sal1981 on May 01, 2020, 12:52:46 PM
I just wonder how the playing field would be in the U.S. if there were more than 3 political parties there. I don't count the independents as a party.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 01, 2020, 12:53:11 PM
Literally the only thing I can think of at this point is the Dems want to lose because Trump has been a massive boon for their fundraising. Keeping the #VoteBlueNoMatterWho crowd riled up and angry means more people throwing their money at the party thinking they will fix things and get the dumbass out of the White House.

It's either massive money or massive egos that are making the Democrats do everything in their power to lose this election, or maybe both. But there is no way the Dems are actually taking this election seriously, I refuse to believe that given literally every step the party has taken has been the worst possible step they could take.

Wait until Hillary replaces Joe ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 01, 2020, 12:54:36 PM
I just wonder how the playing field would be in the U.S. if there were more than 3 political parties there. I don't count the independents as a party.

While the system reinforces the two party system (but parliamentary systems do not) ... if the Americans took term limits seriously, or simply refused to vote for organized crime syndicates ... there could be more parties on a practical level.  We support organized crime syndicates because we are ... criminals.  We support everything Chinese because we are traitors.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on May 01, 2020, 01:02:58 PM
I just wonder how the playing field would be in the U.S. if there were more than 3 political parties there. I don't count the independents as a party.

The major problem is the requirements to be a third party in the United States are absolutely insane compared to the rest of the West. You have to be a party of hundreds of millions of dollars to realistically even be able to have a voice, and that's just not going to happen.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 01, 2020, 01:18:10 PM
The major problem is the requirements to be a third party in the United States are absolutely insane compared to the rest of the West. You have to be a party of hundreds of millions of dollars to realistically even be able to have a voice, and that's just not going to happen.

If MSM dominates elections, you are right (I mean Left).  Why allow MSM to dominate elections?  Do you know how much money it takes for a 30 second political video advert?  Make the MSM give free coverage to all parties and all candidates?  That and real term limits would revolutionize the US.

"US election to be riddled with deepfakes" ... and that is just the candidates ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 02, 2020, 12:26:50 AM
"Oregon County Says "No Whites Allowed"" ... county employees at one county in Oregon are trying to act like college student crybabies ... at this point, after a lifetime of sympathy for African-Americans ... my sympathy ends.  Either that or nobody gets hired until they pass 30 years of age (inverse Logan's Run).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on May 02, 2020, 12:44:31 AM
Literally the only thing I can think of at this point is the Dems want to lose because Trump has been a massive boon for their fundraising.
But if their centrist nominee loses, wouldn't that be a huge wakeup call to the Dems?  And next time, they'll make damn sure they appeal to the base - solid lefties - so their base is fully motivated to vote for them.  Right?

Or they could assume that they need to go further to the right and nominate some lukewarm centrist and alienate their own base in order to broaden their appeal with old-school center-right "centrists" (who are either pushing walkers or pushing daisies at this point) as well as Republicans who definitely won't vote for them.

Either one sounds equally viable.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on May 02, 2020, 09:07:13 AM
It's either massive money or massive egos that are making the Democrats do everything in their power to lose this election, or maybe both. But there is no way the Dems are actually taking this election seriously, I refuse to believe that given literally every step the party has taken has been the worst possible step they could take.

I think Democrats are taking this election very seriously. My friends and family who are Democrats have been fretting this year more than any election I can think of. Clearly progressives think Bernie should have been the candidate but a LOT of Democrats apparently don't want the serious, systemic changes that Bernie and progressives advocate. According to Pew Research, 54 percent of Democrats identify as either moderate or conservative. The voting pattern of this primary indicates that progressive Democrats currently comprise 30-35% of the party. Progressives obviously think Biden is a bad choice, and he may be, but it seems likely one of the centrist candidates was going to win.

Right now, Biden is the presumptive Democratic candidate. With new attention to these allegations of rape, it is entirely possible that Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg, and Klobuchar could unsuspend their campaigns. Right-wing media could actually assist Democrats who are concerned about these allegations to pressure Biden to withdraw. Perhaps with some polite fiction about Biden's health, he could step down and endorse another candidate. The Democratic convention isn't until August.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 02, 2020, 09:50:46 AM
Elections ... A Left candidate doesn't get a plurality, a Right candidate doesn't get a plurality, a Centrist candidate doesn't get a plurality, because the electorate is a wide spectrum that agrees on nothing.  It is a miracle anyone actually gets a majority of votes cast (and/or electoral college to prevent domination by LA and NYC).  Even in a large state like California, there are calls for an internal electoral college, because S California doesn't agree with N California, and doesn't want San Francisco to turn state-wide elections, even more so in NY, where NYC means that upstate NY is ignored.  There are calls for secession within states.  Just look at the electoral map of Michigan ... Detroit should be its own state.  The US was designed in a time without big cities, when most people were farmers.  The metro-areas should be their own states.  Metro areas have been a problem since the days of ancient Rome.

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on May 02, 2020, 09:59:52 AM
a LOT of Democrats apparently don't want the serious, systemic changes that Bernie and progressives advocate
Spurred on by the open hostility of Party leadership and their wealthy backers, who echo Republican sentiments (and stances)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 02, 2020, 10:04:53 AM
Spurred on by the open hostility of Party leadership and their wealthy backers, who echo Republican sentiments (and stances)

Bernie Bros are controlled opposition.  Bernie is a bait-and-switch shill/grifter.  The Left would do better moving to Venezuela.

"THE WHO NOW PRAISES SWEDEN FOR ITS CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE" ... proof they are a utopia just like China ;-)

Yes, Munch, all the old people "should" die, sooner or later.  It is what nature requires.  Nobody likes this of course, except bad people.  But all people are bad ...
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: aitm on May 02, 2020, 11:06:30 AM
People think they can get into the "mind" of Trump, while having said he is stupid or insane.  What does that say about you..
That we can walk through a shallow puddle without getting wet.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 02, 2020, 12:23:31 PM
That we can walk through a shallow puddle without getting wet.

Yes, woke people are Mother Teresa's stormtoopers ... bwahah.  Go probe Bernie's head or Biden's head.  Not much there either.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 03, 2020, 09:32:36 AM
Speaking of bipartisan war policy ...

"Ex-Green Beret Was Behind Failed Attempt At 'Armed Invasion' Of Venezuela Funded By US Billionaires" ... Bay of Spam?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on May 03, 2020, 05:13:13 PM
More 2016 related than 2020, but the DNC has not changed much since then and I found this really interesting. Apparently for years now the DNC has been in a very tight financial bind and have resorted to some really sketchy financial juggling to stay afloat, namely being completely at the mercy of Hillary Clinton. The speaker in the quotes bellow is Donna Brazile, a former interim Chair of the DNC.

Also, as Biden's polls are starting to slump and he is falling further and further behind in fundraising to Trump, Hillary has increasingly reintroduced herself to the public and begun touring the country again. My money is still on her being the nomination.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774 (https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774)

Quote
The Saturday morning after the convention in July, I called Gary Gensler, the chief financial officer of Hillary’s campaign. He wasted no words. He told me the Democratic Party was broke and $2 million in debt.

“What?” I screamed. “I am an officer of the party and they’ve been telling us everything is fine and they were raising money with no problems.”

That wasn’t true, he said. Officials from Hillary’s campaign had taken a look at the DNC’s books. Obama left the party $24 million in debt—$15 million in bank debt and more than $8 million owed to vendors after the 2012 campaign—and had been paying that off very slowly. Obama’s campaign was not scheduled to pay it off until 2016. Hillary for America (the campaign) and the Hillary Victory Fund (its joint fundraising vehicle with the DNC) had taken care of 80 percent of the remaining debt in 2016, about $10 million, and had placed the party on an allowance.

If I didn’t know about this, I assumed that none of the other officers knew about it, either. That was just Debbie’s way. In my experience she didn’t come to the officers of the DNC for advice and counsel. She seemed to make decisions on her own and let us know at the last minute what she had decided, as she had done when she told us about the hacking only minutes before the Washington Post broke the news.

...

Individuals who had maxed out their $2,700 contribution limit to the campaign could write an additional check for $353,400 to the Hillary Victory Fund—that figure represented $10,000 to each of the 32 states’ parties who were part of the Victory Fund agreement—$320,000—and $33,400 to the DNC. The money would be deposited in the states first, and transferred to the DNC shortly after that. Money in the battleground states usually stayed in that state, but all the other states funneled that money directly to the DNC, which quickly transferred the money to Brooklyn.

“Wait,” I said. “That victory fund was supposed to be for whoever was the nominee, and the state party races. You’re telling me that Hillary has been controlling it since before she got the nomination?”

...

Right around the time of the convention, the leaked emails revealed Hillary’s campaign was grabbing money from the state parties for its own purposes, leaving the states with very little to support down-ballot races. A Politico story published on May 2, 2016, described the big fund-raising vehicle she had launched through the states the summer before, quoting a vow she had made to rebuild “the party from the ground up … when our state parties are strong, we win. That’s what will happen.”

Yet the states kept less than half of 1 percent of the $82 million they had amassed from the extravagant fund-raisers Hillary’s campaign was holding, just as Gary had described to me when he and I talked in August. When the Politico story described this arrangement as “essentially … money laundering” for the Clinton campaign, Hillary’s people were outraged at being accused of doing something shady. Bernie’s people were angry for their own reasons, saying this was part of a calculated strategy to throw the nomination to Hillary.

...

When I got back from a vacation in Martha’s Vineyard, I at last found the document that described it all: the Joint Fund-Raising Agreement between the DNC, the Hillary Victory Fund, and Hillary for America.

The agreement—signed by Amy Dacey, the former CEO of the DNC, and Robby Mook with a copy to Marc Elias—specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.

I had been wondering why it was that I couldn’t write a press release without passing it by Brooklyn. Well, here was the answer.

...

I had tried to search out any other evidence of internal corruption that would show that the DNC was rigging the system to throw the primary to Hillary, but I could not find any in party affairs or among the staff. I had gone department by department, investigating individual conduct for evidence of skewed decisions, and I was happy to see that I had found none. Then I found this agreement.

The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was not illegal, but it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity.

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on May 03, 2020, 06:33:50 PM
I read that article twice, and still have difficulty following it.  I get the general impression that Hillary somehow got control of the money.  "Not illegal, but unethical," so it was said.  It sounds like there's a lot of money (even through the DNC is 2 million in debt).  Suddenly there's 82 million that Hillary is controlling.  I don't know how this happens with that much money.  Isn't there an accountant keeping track?  Isn't there some sort of protocol for disbursing it, or is there just a big pile of money sitting on the table for candidates to grab when other's aren't watching:  "Now look, you all, you can take as much as you need, but only your fair share.  We are on the honor system, got that!?" 

But if we don't actually know how candidates get the nomination, because that's only known to the cabal, why should we expect to understand how they handle all the money that the DNC asks me for at least three times each day?  Get some high school kid who got an "A" in some business course, and put him in charge of the DNC.  Is it that bad, or is this just nothing really, and the best man usually wins, so no biggie?  And what's this about Hillary getting the nomination again. Hey, I'm up for a good conspiracy, as much as the next guy, and if that's the way democracy works, count me in, but if you are going to conspire, don't do something stupid that serves no real objective.

But my real question about this report is whether it's credible, or is it just more liner for the cat box?  Or worse yet, could it be both.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on May 03, 2020, 06:48:07 PM
From how I understand it...

Hillary came in and paid off the majority of the DNC's post-Obama campaign debt and then told the DNC how they could spend the remaining money her campaign and fund raised. The problem rises in that the fund was established with the goal of getting the DNC out of debt and building up a war chest for DNC candidates, from top to bottom, to pull from... but instead the funds overwhelmingly went to Hillary's campaign (giving it an unfair advantage over other candidates and denying down-ticket campaigns that expected access to DNC funds the cash to run a successful campaign) as well as consuls.

It basically became another way for the wealthy to circumvent rules towards funding an individual candidate, as well as gave that candidate leverage over the party; she bailed them out, so she got to tell them what to do. Which from a business standpoint, I am actually perfectly fine with... the problem is our elections aren't suppose to be a business.

Quote
But my real question about this report is whether it's credible, or is it just more liner for the cat box?  Or worse yet, could it be both.

Given the leaked DNC emails that exposed they were funding the Clinton campaign long before she was the nomination, which is not protocol, I would assume it's credible. It also collaborates with Tulsi Gabbard's stories about corruption within the party.

Like it said... what they did wasn't "illegal" (though it probably should be), but it was certainly unethical and basically means the DNC staff were choosing the candidate for the people rather than the people choosing the candidate, at the cost of smaller local campaigns being hurt. They put all their eggs in one basket and then dropped it.

The DNC honestly needs to crash and burn at this point. Either a complete overhaul or let it die and have a third party/parties take it's place, because right now it does not represent it's constituents and is financially unable to sustain itself. As it stands it is just a walking husk that refuses to die but only continues to exist so it can extend it's own life.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 03, 2020, 07:01:22 PM
I read that article twice, and still have difficulty following it.  I get the general impression that Hillary somehow got control of the money.  "Not illegal, but unethical," so it was said.  It sounds like there's a lot of money (even through the DNC is 2 million in debt).  Suddenly there's 82 million that Hillary is controlling.  I don't know how this happens with that much money.  Isn't there an accountant keeping track?  Isn't there some sort of protocol for disbursing it, or is there just a big pile of money sitting on the table for candidates to grab when other's aren't watching:  "Now look, you all, you can take as much as you need, but only your fair share.  We are on the honor system, got that!?" 

But if we don't actually know how candidates get the nomination, because that's only known to the cabal, why should we expect to understand how they handle all the money that the DNC asks me for at least three times each day?  Get some high school kid who got an "A" in some business course, and put him in charge of the DNC.  Is it that bad, or is this just nothing really, and the best man usually wins, so no biggie?  And what's this about Hillary getting the nomination again. Hey, I'm up for a good conspiracy, as much as the next guy, and if that's the way democracy works, count me in, but if you are going to conspire, don't do something stupid that serves no real objective.

But my real question about this report is whether it's credible, or is it just more liner for the cat box?  Or worse yet, could it be both.

DNC and RNC are private organizations.  Not part of the Constitution at all (similar to the Federal Reserve, but at least that has statutory authority).

Has everyone forgotten already that Bloomberg would pay for everything Dem this year?  The Clinton Foundation money is probably in a Cayman Islands bank account.

The recently released internal party goings-on of the British Labour party in the run up to the 2017 election campaign is just as shocking.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 05, 2020, 12:42:20 PM
"Elvis Was King, Ike Was President, & 116,000 Americans Died In A Pandemic" ... then the 60s happened and we was f*cked forever ;-(

"Democrat 'Disinfo' Group Using DARPA-Funded Tech; Will Pay Shills To Target Pro-Trump Accounts" ... this election cycle, Hillary won't hire the Brits and Russians.

"WILL THEY RENAME HARVARD TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY?" ... colleges aren't just petri dishes for communism, they are also petri dishes for pedophilia.




Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 06, 2020, 08:07:44 PM
"FACEBOOK ANNOUNCES ITS NEW "CENSORSHIP BOARD" WHO DETERMINE IF YOU GET BANNED OR NOT" ... Google owned YouTube is using AI.  Who is on the Facebook board, C3PO?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Mr.Obvious on May 08, 2020, 02:41:03 AM
"FACEBOOK ANNOUNCES ITS NEW "CENSORSHIP BOARD" WHO DETERMINE IF YOU GET BANNED OR NOT" ... Google owned YouTube is using AI.  Who is on the Facebook board, C3PO?

This has to do with the conversation, somehow?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 08, 2020, 08:48:13 AM
This has to do with the conversation, somehow?

Google and Facebook controlled the US 2016 election.  They will control the 2020 election.  Voters don't matter, because they are sheep who bleat because "opinion makers" and "narrative managers" are their masters.  There are similar forces in Europe.  I favor the end of democracy, remember?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 08, 2020, 08:52:35 AM
"1996 Court Filing Corroborates Biden Accuser's Claim She Was Harassed" ... oops, should have burned all the evidence decades ago

"US B-1B Bombers Again Fly Near Chinese Airspace Amid 'New Cold War' Threat" ... US last month threatened China with B52s over Taiwan.  US Navy visited the Barents Sea for the first time since the 80s.  A war President gets re-elected (unless you are George H W).

"Schiff Folds: Publishes Russiagate Transcripts After Showdown With DNI" ... selective leaking is a game both parties play.  DNI threatened Schiff, they would release if he didn't.  This may be as significant as the rebellion of the NYC FBI office, against Comey (over Weiner laptop) in the weeks prior to the 2016 election.


Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 09, 2020, 05:11:56 PM
"MSNBC CLAIMS RUSSIA AND EVEN PUTIN HIMSELF WAS INVOLVED IN FLYNN'S CASE BEING DROPPED, THEY'RE NUT.." ... MSM is Alex Jones.  If we still had the Fairness Doctrine in US Media, since 1987, none of this mixing of fact and editorial would have happened.

""This Is The Final Straw": Elon Musk Melts Down, Says He's Suing Alameda County & Moving Tesla Out Of California" ... People's Republic of California ... they only need bicycles made in China.  And made for two, you and your parole officer ;-)

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 10, 2020, 03:15:38 PM
"MSNBC HOST COMES OUT AND ADMITS THEIR VIEWERS ARE PARANOID BUT THEN BLAMES RUSSIA" ... says a lot about Democrats, no Republican or Independent would watch MSNBC (or the other Chinese controlled media).  MSM is Alex Jones for cuckistanis and normies.

“In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.”― Friedrich Nietzsche
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Mr.Obvious on May 10, 2020, 05:43:37 PM
You know, it might just be my feeble mind, but this is starting to feel like it's detailing the conversation somehow.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 10, 2020, 08:28:34 PM
You know, it might just be my feeble mind, but this is starting to feel like it's detailing the conversation somehow.

Why does this election matter to Hercule Poirot?  Y'all are going to be slaves in the Chinese Empire now.  Can you pull a rickshaw?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on May 10, 2020, 09:03:34 PM
I learned how to drive a rickshaw by watching Seinfeld.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 10, 2020, 09:07:03 PM
I learned how to drive a rickshaw by watching Seinfeld.

Better I guess, than being one of the Emperor's eunuchs.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on May 11, 2020, 05:19:03 AM
Watching the latest John Oliver, this time talking about something less depressing than the death of hundreds of thousands of people to the Corona virus and instead talking about the loss of employment of hundreds of thousands of workers and the desecration of one of America's oldest institutions, the USPS, being absolutely gutted and anally fucked, bipartisanly at that and beginning in Obama's reign, makes me more and more convinced that the only way we will see meaningful change is when both the Democrats and the Republicans and thrown out of office, by force if necessary (but also utterly unlikely and impossible. At best we can hope it collapses peacefully enough that rational heads can take over instead of just who is most ruthless).

America is officially a failed state. It was a good run, a wonderful experiment, but it's dead. The Legislative and Judicial branches are the lapdogs of the Executive branch, which is the lap dog of corporate interests and corrupt parties that only view the world in "red vs blue" lenses. The DoJ answers exclusively to the president, not the law, and anyone who questions this is subject to being imprisoned and silenced.

Trump, Biden... it doesn't really matter anymore. The ship is sunk, regardless of who is at the wheel.

Just enjoy the band playing while the Titanic sinks. The rich already hogged all the lifeboats, so might as well at least enjoy the music while you drown.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: SGOS on May 11, 2020, 09:13:08 AM
At first it seems odd that our leaders are so dedicated to getting rid of the post office, especially considering that the post office is self supporting.  Although to be fair, I have not heard the old lie that it's too expensive to fund in recent years.  Yes, people can email and text, and junk mail could simply be eliminated. I believe the reason for under funding the USPS is to make way for private enterprise.  UPS and FedEx have no doubt bought a yacht or two for Congress, but they are not very well equipped to deliver anything but packages.  But with government subsidies and some investment of their own, they could be.  But where does the consumer fit in when private enterprise and profit motives raise consumer costs once the market it cornered?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 11, 2020, 12:34:47 PM
Watching the latest John Oliver, this time talking about something less depressing than the death of hundreds of thousands of people to the Corona virus and instead talking about the loss of employment of hundreds of thousands of workers and the desecration of one of America's oldest institutions, the USPS, being absolutely gutted and anally fucked, bipartisanly at that and beginning in Obama's reign, makes me more and more convinced that the only way we will see meaningful change is when both the Democrats and the Republicans and thrown out of office, by force if necessary (but also utterly unlikely and impossible. At best we can hope it collapses peacefully enough that rational heads can take over instead of just who is most ruthless).

America is officially a failed state. It was a good run, a wonderful experiment, but it's dead. The Legislative and Judicial branches are the lapdogs of the Executive branch, which is the lap dog of corporate interests and corrupt parties that only view the world in "red vs blue" lenses. The DoJ answers exclusively to the president, not the law, and anyone who questions this is subject to being imprisoned and silenced.

Trump, Biden... it doesn't really matter anymore. The ship is sunk, regardless of who is at the wheel.

Just enjoy the band playing while the Titanic sinks. The rich already hogged all the lifeboats, so might as well at least enjoy the music while you drown.

I have been a critic of the government since the 60s.  But the USPS thing took me by surprise!  A nation of the UPS, by FedEx, for Congressional grifters.  This started with Sen Feinstein's husband getting small post office buildings on the cheap, as they were closed deliberately.  Sen Feinstein is a known Chinese agent (had a CCP operative as her driver for 20 years).  Benjamin Franklin is the founder of the post office.  But it has been overtaken by "benjamins" changing hands.  Thank you voters ... you had a good run, enjoy your FEMA camps and in-US Chinese slave factories.  One thing that alienated the post office from public support is junk mail ... something they are ordered to subsidize by Congress (who listens carefully to lobbyists for over 200 years now).

Also the Federal Reserve has not yet eliminated all competition ...

http://dollarsandsense.org/archives/2013/0613scher.html

We could all have free checking at the post office.  Maybe even win a toaster premium for a big deposit!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 11, 2020, 12:44:54 PM
""A Legal Nightmare": In Latest European "Freakshow", EU Threatens To Sue Germany Over QE Ruling" ... uniquely, it is against the German constitution, for EU law to be superior to German law.  This is why the recent court ruling against "EU bonds" in general and the "Security Mechanism" instituted to handle internal loans (not grants like bonds would be) to Cyprus/Greece in 2013/2015 and planned for the post-Covid recovery ... is a great bother.  This reaction by Brussels may make Germany the next state to leave the EU (as predicted by some before).  The German public will never allow that they are equals to other EU states (aka bankrupt simps).

"DEMOCRATS WANT BIDEN TO CHOOSE WARREN AS RUNNING MATE, PROVING THEY ARE NUTS" ... they are trying to corner the upset Bernie voters.  But Biden has to make Bernie the running mate to do that.  Warren came in 3rd in her home state!!  Bernie as Biden VP is our best chance at a communist coup.  Probably much better than Fuhrer Hillary burning the Reichstag.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Cassia on May 11, 2020, 01:10:10 PM
Watching the latest John Oliver, this time talking about something less depressing than the death of hundreds of thousands of people to the Corona virus and instead talking about the loss of employment of hundreds of thousands of workers and the desecration of one of America's oldest institutions, the USPS, being absolutely gutted and anally fucked, bipartisanly at that and beginning in Obama's reign, makes me more and more convinced that the only way we will see meaningful change is when both the Democrats and the Republicans and thrown out of office, by force if necessary (but also utterly unlikely and impossible. At best we can hope it collapses peacefully enough that rational heads can take over instead of just who is most ruthless).

America is officially a failed state. It was a good run, a wonderful experiment, but it's dead. The Legislative and Judicial branches are the lapdogs of the Executive branch, which is the lap dog of corporate interests and corrupt parties that only view the world in "red vs blue" lenses. The DoJ answers exclusively to the president, not the law, and anyone who questions this is subject to being imprisoned and silenced.

Trump, Biden... it doesn't really matter anymore. The ship is sunk, regardless of who is at the wheel.

Just enjoy the band playing while the Titanic sinks. The rich already hogged all the lifeboats, so might as well at least enjoy the music while you drown.

The US is far from being an 'officially' failed state totally void of rule of law, basic services and essential commodities. Nonetheless it is at least a partially failed state, unable to fulfill the 'ideals' that it supposedly holds dear.  I have hope that millennials will aspire to those ideals in the very, very near future. The ruling class has become so relatively wealthy and dominant. This election will be telling. If gen-xrs and millennials vote in large numbers this November that will be the first signal that they will control our destiny. If they don't participate then yes...this is the beginning of the end of the US and the fake capitalist system that is rigged to reward corruption and failure in a downward spiral towards anarchy.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on May 11, 2020, 01:17:06 PM
At first it seems odd that our leaders are so dedicated to getting rid of the post office, especially considering that the post office is self supporting.  Although to be fair, I have not heard the old lie that it's too expensive to fund in recent years.  Yes, people can email and text, and junk mail could simply be eliminated. I believe the reason for under funding the USPS is to make way for private enterprise.  UPS and FedEx have no doubt bought a yacht or two for Congress, but they are not very well equipped to deliver anything but packages.  But with government subsidies and some investment of their own, they could be.  But where does the consumer fit in when private enterprise and profit motives raise consumer costs once the market it cornered?
Back in 2005 the USPS had lots of money, so they announced that they would be converting their fleet to hybrid vehicles. The oil companies wouldn't have that, so they got the politicians to pass a law requiring USPS to fund their pensions at 5 billion a year to ensure that they could pay the pensions is postal workers who haven't even been born yet.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Mike Cl on May 11, 2020, 01:22:31 PM
The US is far from being an 'officially' failed state totally void of rule of law, basic services and essential commodities. Nonetheless it is at least a partially failed state, unable to fulfill the 'ideals' that it supposedly holds dear.  I have hope that millennials will aspire to those ideals in the very, very near future. The ruling class has become so relatively wealthy and dominant. This election will be telling. If gen-xrs and millennials vote in large numbers this November that will be the first signal that they will control our destiny. If they don't participate then yes...this is the beginning of the end of the US and the fake capitalist system that is rigged to reward corruption and failure in a downward spiral towards anarchy.
I agree with all you said, except for the last word.  If the next election fails, then we are not going into anarchy, but dictatorship--if trump wins, then he will accept it as a mandate to totally take over and he will.  But there will be law--donald's law.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 11, 2020, 02:50:13 PM
I agree with all you said, except for the last word.  If the next election fails, then we are not going into anarchy, but dictatorship--if trump wins, then he will accept it as a mandate to totally take over and he will.  But there will be law--donald's law.

I prefer Obama's law.  Cat food commission for seniors.  MikeCL ... got your Kibbles & Bits yet?

Yes, the world belongs to the 20-60 year olds.  They need to get at it!  Alas, the ideals of any nation, including the US, are lies.  Reality is for adults.  Pikachu Detective is for children.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Mr.Obvious on May 11, 2020, 04:24:20 PM
Why does this election matter to Hercule Poirot?  Y'all are going to be slaves in the Chinese Empire now.  Can you pull a rickshaw?

If you think it didn't have its influence in Europe who was commander in chief in the USA, you'd be a fool. But even if it didn't I do think I'm allowed to create a thread about something that might not influence me personally, but that I might find interesting and be of relevance to most on this site.
So, I'll leave he rickshaw comment be, if we can return to the shawshank situation.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 11, 2020, 11:22:00 PM
If you think it didn't have its influence in Europe who was commander in chief in the USA, you'd be a fool. But even if it didn't I do think I'm allowed to create a thread about something that might not influence me personally, but that I might find interesting and be of relevance to most on this site.
So, I'll leave he rickshaw comment be, if we can return to the shawshank situation.

Didn't mean to be personal.  Must suck to have no vote at all in that, vs a fake vote that American citizens get ;-)

I value very highly the non-US posters.  Less delusion or at least better educated delusion ;-)

The rickshaw was suggested to me by Unbeliever's post.  It is well known that Europeans are more fit, because they get more exercise.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 13, 2020, 08:47:47 AM
"Soros Has "Faith That Trump Will Destroy Himself", Fears "Weakened" Xi, Sees "Existential Risk" For EU" ... evil Bilderburgers.  Vote Hot Dog Now!

"YouTube CEO Admits Users Don't Like Boosting Of "Authoritative" Mainstream Channels, But They Do It Anyway" ... YouTube owned by Google, Google owned by CIA.

"You're Being Conditioned To Live In A "Smart City" – Resist It!" ... Pavlov's dogs.  Drool you fools!  The little bell is ringing!

The only way to fight China, is to become China ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 13, 2020, 09:04:14 AM
"DEMOCRATS SNEAK IN LOOPHOLE ENDING VOTER ID LAWS INTO COVID RELIEF BILL" ... part of three trillion new proposal.  Make all Mexicans US citizens now!  Dead Americans have been voting for decades now.

PS ...

"Facebook Creates Lobbying Group To Argue Big Tech Is "Essential To Free Speech"" ... essential for Boomers still using Facebook

"Europe In Crisis: German Judges Strike Back, Say ECB Isn't "Master Of The Universe"" ... will Germany exit the EU?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 13, 2020, 06:00:43 PM
"Greta Thunberg Repurposed For CNN Town Hall On Coronavirus" ... CNN, Communist News Network

PS ....

Harris a good VP for Biden?

"Undercover journalist suing Kamala Harris for conspiring to violate his civil rights through prosecution" ... she has a history
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 15, 2020, 07:07:35 AM
"New Facial Recognition Software Predicts You're A Criminal Based On Your Looks" ... better than measuring bumps on the head (lack fo social distancing).  I don't need software, I go by "beady eyes" ;-(

"Cop Who Hid While Parkland Students Were Slaughtered Wins Job Back, Plus Back Pay And Overtime" ... ultimate reward for non-participation

PS ... what about masks.  Will this software see thru my Covid mask?  Or is that how it identifies if I am a criminal .. because I am not wearing one?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 15, 2020, 02:05:52 PM
"'85,000 jobs have been lost in the US and millions of Americans have died' since pandemic began... apparently." ... Biden misspeaks again.  The lying dog faced pony soldier he is!

"Facebook Buys Giphy For $400 Million As Tech Giant Pledges To Banish All "Hateful Memes"" ... I "praise Kek" in your general direction

"US Industrial Production Plunges By Most In Over 100 Years" ... All Hail China, All Hail China!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 15, 2020, 10:00:30 PM
"Global Cooling!! Low Solar Activity To Cause Temperatures To Plummet, Say Scientists" ... trust the science ... bwahaha.  Public policy based on Nazi scientists vs Stalin's scientists.

"No Proof That Russia Hacked DNC - Democrats Hid Sworn CrowdStrike Testimony For Over 2 Years" ... part of the current revelation from unsealed documents.  Hard to continue to lie via innuendo.  DNC didn't allow FBI to investigate, so they hired a Hillary-connected company, that found nothing (experts at the time said it was clearly accessed locally via a thumb drive (Seth Rich?) not via on-line from Russia.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on May 16, 2020, 03:02:12 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3oE384ILy4
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 16, 2020, 12:32:09 PM
Angry Young Men - check
Real Woke - check

Don't roll over and play dead until you collect your social security!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on May 16, 2020, 01:40:30 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3oE384ILy4

This guy thinks it would be better if Bernie had "fallen on his sword", not supported Biden, and called out corruption. Biden doesn't need Bernie's endorsement to win the Democratic nomination and Bernie claiming he was robbed will not change that result. Bernie expressly stated he was endorsing the presumptive Democratic nominee because Trump must be defeated, which I don't see as hypocritical. What would have been hypocritical would be to ask to lead the Democratic Party and then refuse to support the Democratic candidate. Bernie can't hand his supporter's votes to Biden "to be raped", Biden has to convince Bernie's former supporters to vote for him, which they may or may not do.

The primary clearly demonstrated that progressives currently don't have the votes to control the Democratic Party, however, progressives definitely have the power to prevent Biden from defeating Trump. Because Democrats, unfortunately, don't appear to be willing to prevent Biden from being the nominee, I recommend progressives use their political leverage to pressure Biden into making clear, specific, very public promises to support issues progressives care about.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 16, 2020, 01:59:02 PM
That is the problem with politics.  No positive motivation, just negative motivation.  That in itself is weak.

Biden may not live long enough to get the nomination (he doesn't have the majority of votes yet), or the broken convention (thanks to Covid and possible un-seating of many state delegations) may delegitimize his nomination.  If he dropped out now due to ill health, then the convention should support Bernie as the runner up, not Hillary nor Cuomo nor Bloomberg.  So Bernie might yet run in the Fall, if a bit slowly given his age ;-)

Political talk is like morbidly fat fans arguing over a football game.  They can't even hike their own balls.

PS ...

“Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it.”    ―  Thomas Sowell (a Black man).
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Cassia on May 16, 2020, 05:08:09 PM
I find this about me surprising.  As I age I am becoming more and more 'liberal' and less and less 'conservative'.  As a younger person I fully expected the process to be the opposite.  Anyway, I am like you in that I think this is too radical an idea for it to catch hold in this country.  Still, I find it an interesting concept.  I'll have to follow the experiments more closely and try to understand what the actual results are.  Right now the 1% have a strangle hold on this country and they are not about to let up any time soon.

I am socially liberal but when it comes to the economy and the global markets (especially China) I actually agree with S. Bannon. China will economically crush a wishy washy US soon enough. We should deal with the Chinese leaders/companies and make them play and pay fairly and hit them in the wallet at every turn. We can't even produce Q-tips without them and their slave labor, let alone so many commodity drugs such as antibiotics, etc. I can't stand tRump however my only worry about Biden is that he will continue to let Wall Street sell us out by using China to produce virtually everything while Americans work shit jobs and stare at the 'Real Housewives of New Jersey'. Yes we are even outsourcing our engineering as well.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 16, 2020, 09:41:16 PM
I am socially liberal but when it comes to the economy and the global markets (especially China) I actually agree with S. Bannon. China will economically crush a wishy washy US soon enough. We should deal with the Chinese leaders/companies and make them play and pay fairly and hit them in the wallet at every turn. We can't even produce Q-tips without them and their slave labor, let alone so many commodity drugs such as antibiotics, etc. I can't stand tRump however my only worry about Biden is that he will continue to let Wall Street sell us out by using China to produce virtually everything while Americans work shit jobs and stare at the 'Real Housewives of New Jersey'. Yes we are even outsourcing our engineering as well.

We have worked for 20 years to make China the sole surviving superpower.  Not the US, not the EU, not Russia.  Russia is just a zit on China's butt, a resource colony like Saudi Arabia is for the US.  The EU is falling apart from its own unresolved contradictions and Chinese Fire Brigade approach to problem solving.  China has a mercantilist fascism (they are only half communist) that is well organized and militant under a single party state.  If China can avoid disintegration (as they always have failed in the past) then they have a great opportunity to take over the world right now.

China and Wall Street are both global fascist.  They were a marriage made in Hell.  That is why Bloomberg is a billionaire, as is Gates etc.  This is a product of the Trilateralist policy from the 70s.  Originally it was the US and the EU dividing up the word (Bilderbergers) during the Cold War.  But David Rockefeller sought to include Japan and the rest of the East in the oligarchy (Trilateralists).  Once China got going, like the Frankenstein Monster, it has a tendency to destroy anything within reach.

This isn't what David Rockefeller imagined.  Carter was our first Trilateralist President.  Trump is the current one.  He isn't fundamentally opposed to China, but the monster is destroying the village, and he doesn't know how to bring it back under control, or even the irate villagers with torches and pitchforks.  Attempts to destroy the Chinese monster, will naturally be met with violent resistance.  So don't bother trying.  BTW the Rothschild family has been running things for China in GB and the EU, via Hong Kong.

Destructive Crony Capitalism is killing us, and China is happy to assist.  Nobody, not even DoD, bothered to notice we can't fight our way out of a paper bag, because all paper bags are made in China ;-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLvGnro4Cgw
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on May 16, 2020, 10:00:31 PM
Because Democrats, unfortunately, don't appear to be willing to prevent Biden from being the nominee, I recommend progressives use their political leverage to pressure Biden into making clear, specific, very public promises to support issues progressives care about.
That's Bernie's current strategy - to leverage his support into platform concessions from the DNC.  Just like he did in 2016.  We'll see if that's enough to right this ship.  Hopefully, it is.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 16, 2020, 10:05:58 PM
That's Bernie's current strategy - to leverage his support into platform concessions from the DNC.  Just like he did in 2016.  We'll see if that's enough to right this ship.  Hopefully, it is.

Why do you expect anything more than lip service and virtue signaling from the Establishment.  Follow the money, not the activist crap.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on May 16, 2020, 10:19:45 PM
Why do you expect anything more than lib service and virtue signaling from the Establishment.  Follow the money, not the activist crap.

Yep. This is why I don't buy the "Oh, Progressives need to just shut up and support the Democrats, because they will magically start to listen to us!".

No, no they won't. They haven't listened for 40+ years... they aren't going to start now. They don't give a fuck about what the voters want, otherwise they wouldn't rig the primaries in favour of their selected candidate.

The only thing they ever listen to is $$$.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 16, 2020, 11:48:30 PM
Yep. This is why I don't buy the "Oh, Progressives need to just shut up and support the Democrats, because they will magically start to listen to us!".

No, no they won't. They haven't listened for 40+ years... they aren't going to start now. They don't give a fuck about what the voters want, otherwise they wouldn't rig the primaries in favour of their selected candidate.

The only thing they ever listen to is $$$.

The US is a bi-political oligarchy.  The Dems run a variety of captive polities (plantations).  The Left and Blacks are plantations.  They give a little ear, and then fuck you the rest of the time.  Good massa that.  The Rethugs are medieval, with vast wealth protected by virtual castles and an MSM priesthood, that is only LARPing liberalism.  Not one of those Media people will give away their wealth, should they acquire it, to the poor!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on May 17, 2020, 01:03:24 AM
Yep. This is why I don't buy the "Oh, Progressives need to just shut up and support the Democrats, because they will magically start to listen to us!".

No, no they won't. They haven't listened for 40+ years... they aren't going to start now. They don't give a fuck about what the voters want, otherwise they wouldn't rig the primaries in favour of their selected candidate.

The only thing they ever listen to is $$$.
I forget, Clinton has a lot of sway in that department, correct?  And wasn't it Bloomberg (not doing too shabby in the money department, either) who said that the "moderates" should all drop out except for the DNC-annointed so that the outcome will be in the establishment's favor?  I wonder what sort of backroom deal Obama worked out with them to make that happen.  Looking back, the failure of liberals to really sway this in favor of a liberal candidate should be expected.  On a good day, they might have had the votes (or at least a plurality) but they didn't control the game.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 17, 2020, 10:27:23 AM
"US WAR GAMES PREDICT THE US WILL LOSE TO CHINA IN A PACIFIC WAR, COULD THIS BE WRONG??" ... what, with millions on the W Coast of the US, chanting Ho Ho Ho Chi Min?

"Turkey Demands New NATO Intervention In Libya: "Haftar Must Be Stopped"" ... funny how Haftar is supported by Russia, Israel, Egypt and the US.  Maybe there should be a NATO intervention in Turkey, like the prior one in Libya?

"How Huxley's X-Club Created Nature Magazine & Sabotaged Science For 150 Years" .. the Elite have always believed in Malthus


Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on May 17, 2020, 07:26:26 PM
Perhaps one positive coming out of this crisis is it looks like it's making the Democrats realise that drastic changes have to be made. I think they know if they win, and don't fulfill their promises, there might not be a Democrat (or Republican) party once it's all said and done.

My guess is once things stabilize a bit they will slip back into their old habits, but who knows. And who knows if their drastic changes will be drastic enough... I'm not going to hold my breath on it, but we will see.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/17/us/politics/joe-biden-economy-democrats.html?referringSource=articleShare (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/17/us/politics/joe-biden-economy-democrats.html?referringSource=articleShare)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on May 17, 2020, 07:52:30 PM
I think they know if they win, and don't fulfill their promises, there might not be a Democrat (or Republican) party once it's all said and done.
My (hopefully wrong) impression is the opposite: if they can win without fulfilling promises, then they will not need to honor any promises again and this can just become a Big Donor party, at least unofficially.  Hey, it worked for the Republicans.  Then we truly will be screwed because the two-party system doesn't allow for viable third parties, so if both parties become unresponsive to the people, then the people will be effectively shut out of the process.  A democracy in name only.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Shiranu on May 17, 2020, 09:07:23 PM
My (hopefully wrong) impression is the opposite: if they can win without fulfilling promises, then they will not need to honor any promises again and this can just become a Big Donor party, at least unofficially.  Hey, it worked for the Republicans.  Then we truly will be screwed because the two-party system doesn't allow for viable third parties, so if both parties become unresponsive to the people, then the people will be effectively shut out of the process.  A democracy in name only.

That assumes the Union survives this pandemic even if they don't take drastic steps. I'm not sure that's going to happen; without a dramatic overhaul of our economic system, the working class is going to continue to suffer, and we are seeing the right-wing (and the left-wing as well, in isolated places) growing increasingly vocal and increasingly violent. If the "left" Democrats don't improve the living standards for everyone, I wouldn't be surprised if these armed nutjobs who are storming State capitals start to use their guns for more than just intimidation... and once that happens, who knows whats next?

A side note that is I've been thinking about lately, I always hear that an armed populous is good for forcing the government to listen to what you have to say, a form of checks and balances by the people. What seems to me more the case is that it's a good way to intimidate minorities and people with different ideologies from the State from saying anything. It only seems to be pro-big (right-wing) government nuts who carry assault rifles around in public, never people who are opposed to the state.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 17, 2020, 11:32:05 PM
My (hopefully wrong) impression is the opposite: if they can win without fulfilling promises, then they will not need to honor any promises again and this can just become a Big Donor party, at least unofficially.  Hey, it worked for the Republicans.  Then we truly will be screwed because the two-party system doesn't allow for viable third parties, so if both parties become unresponsive to the people, then the people will be effectively shut out of the process.  A democracy in name only.

"if both parties become unresponsive to the people" ... since 1965 at the latest.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 17, 2020, 11:34:22 PM
Perhaps one positive coming out of this crisis is it looks like it's making the Democrats realise that drastic changes have to be made. I think they know if they win, and don't fulfill their promises, there might not be a Democrat (or Republican) party once it's all said and done.

My guess is once things stabilize a bit they will slip back into their old habits, but who knows. And who knows if their drastic changes will be drastic enough... I'm not going to hold my breath on it, but we will see.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/17/us/politics/joe-biden-economy-democrats.html?referringSource=articleShare (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/17/us/politics/joe-biden-economy-democrats.html?referringSource=articleShare)

They could always try something popular with regular people, not just with feral college students ;-)

If both parties were broken up, then the US could be more like Italy, easier to corrupt and control by the FBI/CIA/CCP.  You know that both of these institutions were founded by pro-Roman Catholics, right?

People who oppose the government, in the US, use bike locks ;-))  Fools!  You must say nasty things on Twitter instead!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 18, 2020, 07:36:32 PM
"OCASIO CORTEZ REFUSES TO PAY FAIR SHARE, WARRANT ISSUED OVER UNPAID TAXES SHE REFUSES TO PAY" ... old business tax bill for $2000 that she forgot to pay and IRS forgot to collect ...
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 19, 2020, 11:33:51 AM
In other news ...

"United Nations Claims It's Politically-Incorrect To Say "Husband" Or "Wife"" ... also they oppose "boyfriend" and "girlfriend".  I support ... kick the UN out of the US

"'City Of 400 Foreign Ships' Illegally Fishing Off Argentina Comes To Life Each Night" ... it isn't just the Dutch and French stealing all the British fish

"Veterans Affairs Police Buy Riot Gear, Citing COVID-19 Pandemic" ... militarization of all Federal agencies with their own mini-armies continues.  Maybe we will break up like China during the warlord period?

"The Sun "Has Gone Into Lockdown", And This Strange Behavior Could Worsen Global Food Shortages" ... expected to drop average temperature by 2 deg C ... cause major climate changes.  Trust the science ;-)  Will be worsened by permanent shutdown of most of the world economy?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 20, 2020, 11:34:14 AM
"TO DEFEND BIDEN, THE NYT SAYS BELIEVE ALL WOMEN IS A "RIGHT WING TRAP"" ... Dems are conspiracy theorists about Rs, Rethugs are conspiracy theorists about Ds.  Lock both up in the sanatarium.

PS ...

"Ukraine Judge Orders Joe Biden Listed As Alleged Perpetrator Of Crime In Prosecutor's Firing" ... getting hot in Kiev

"Feds Find Cozy Connections Nationwide Between China & University Professors" ... the dim sum trail is a dead giveaway ;-)

"Stocks, Yuan Tick Lower As Senate Passes Bill That Could Force De-Listing Of Chinese Companies" ... jump the shark, I dare you ;-(

Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 21, 2020, 11:52:01 AM
"NYT SAYS TESLA OWNERS ARE SCARED THE CARS ARE RIGHT WING NOW AFTER ELON MUSK SAYS TAKE THE RED PIL.." ... Dems are so liberal, we just need to get them to believe that all cars are conservative, and they will have to walk to the polls in November ;-)

"HILARIOUS WASHINGTON POST DAMAGE CONTROL ON THE BIDEN-POROSHENKO CALL" ... that and NYT, CCP outlets not worth a bird cage bottom.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 21, 2020, 02:20:27 PM
"Regime Change Back In Focus: Pompeo Targets Iran, Cuba & Venezuela In Epic Tweet Thread" ... new Axis of Evil, worked out so well last time ;-(

""Nothing Like This Has Happened Before": China To Invest $1 Trillion In New Plan To Overtake US In Tech" ... yes it did.  Americans, continue to buy iPhones so you can help China conquer you.

"Trump To Void 'Open Skies' Treaty With Russia On Friday" ... most confusing pro-Russia guy ever.

"US Outrages China With $180M Torpedoes-For-Taiwan Deal On Same Day President Sworn In" ... Taiwan president that is.  Dems will call for the extermination of Taiwan and Hong Kong yet?

"Trump In 'Desperate Effort To Steal Election' By Opposing Vote-By-Mail, Says DNC's Perez" ... just catching up with Dems who stole most elections from 1960 forward.  No vote without ID.  Vote-by-mail can work with that, the military on deployment does it.

"Trump: China Is "Desperate" For "Sleepy Joe Biden To Win"" ... China has totally subverted non-China.  We can trust them, right?

"FEMA is now hiring near you" ... are you D locking up R, or R locking up D?  Makes a big difference which FEMA camp you work at.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 21, 2020, 08:16:23 PM
"Democratic Party Official Admits He Took Bribes To Stuff Ballot Boxes" ... in 2014, 2015 and 2016.  Just say no to voting.

"BIDEN VOTER SAYS SHE'D SUPPORT HIM EVEN IF HE ATE BOILED BABIES, THEYVE GONE NUTS" ... former Hillary voter and fan of Comet Pizza joint
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Unbeliever on May 21, 2020, 09:44:53 PM
Why do you post so many Onion headlines?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 22, 2020, 09:20:09 AM
Why do you post so many Onion headlines?

Why do you share with us the content of your counseling sessions? ;-)

Reality today is Onion headlines, because CIA narrative writers have made the Onion obsolete.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 22, 2020, 07:41:19 PM
"Biden Apologizes For 'Cavalier' Racism During Damage Control Call With Black Leaders" ... open mouth, insert food.  Pols never learn.  Everyone knows that LBJ set up a new plantation in 1965.

"Obama's Ambassador To Beijing Compares Trump To Hitler On Chinese TV" ... have him executed when he gets back to the US.  Chinese agent.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 24, 2020, 01:47:14 PM
"Questions Over Chinese Influence Emerge After Biden Charitable Organizations Refuse To Disclose Funding" ... if you can look up my ass, I can look up your ass ;-)  Biden made big arrangements with three charities when he left office in 2017 ... what about that $1.3 billion private equity deal, that Hunter Biden inked with China in 2013, mere weeks after both Bidens flew to China on Air Force Two?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 25, 2020, 12:03:26 PM
"Greece Charges Turkey With 'Land Invasion' After Troops Cross River, Raise Turkish Flag" ... what is Biden's position regarding Crazy Erdogan?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on May 25, 2020, 12:28:03 PM
Why do you post so many Onion headlines?
I don't think he can tell the difference.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 25, 2020, 01:03:42 PM
I don't think he can tell the difference.

Can you tell the difference between Salvador Dali headlines?

"My rights are not derived from any government. My rights are not denied by any majority. My rights are because I exist." - Joe Biden

Proof that Biden is Descartes reincarnated.

PS ...

"CHINA-OWNED KAMALA HARRIS TRIES TO SILENCE PEOPLE ABLE TO IDENTIFY WHERE COVID19 ORIGINATED" ... which Dem VP can be more fried rice?  How about Condi Rice?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: GSOgymrat on May 26, 2020, 08:11:26 AM
Why do you post so many Onion headlines?

https://youtu.be/-Uq9pp586AE
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 26, 2020, 09:40:15 AM
How about this Onion ... corrupt, senile, pedophile white male is DNC leading candidate?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 26, 2020, 09:41:34 AM
“EU "Green" Agenda Calls For Eating Bugs To Save The Planet” … Green = communist

“How China Is Building and Bugging Government Offices In African Nations” … trust Huawei.

“Italian Government Urges Unemployed To Become Social-Distancing Snitches” … in Italy this is called fascism.  In America it is called Democrats.

“GOP LAUNCHES LAWSUIT AGAINST CALIFORNIA FOR PUSHING MAIL IN VOTING, ELECTION CORRUPTION IS REAL” … sue both parties before every election, so that no election is free of the cloud of fraud.  Democracy itself is fraud, it isn't just the parties.

"WILL DEMOCRATS TRY TO SUSPEND THE ELECTION DEBATES OR JUST MAKE THEM DIGITAL ONLY?" ... America can't make any ballots.  They are all made in China now.  Each will come pre-voted with Biden's name ;-)

PS ...

"Rep. Omar Declares That She Believes Biden Is A Rapist But Should Be The Next President" ... says Congress woman who married her own brother and lied about it.

"Petition Calls For Investigation Into Twitter Censorship After Hiring Of Li Fei-Fei" ... Twitter is CCP asset

"Indian Media Reports Up To 10,000 Chinese Soldiers Have 'Invaded' Border Territory" ... curry rice vs fried rice

"YouTube Caught Censoring Comments Deemed 'Offensive' To The Communist Party" ... or offensive to DNC?

"House Republicans sue Pelosi in bid to stop proxy voting amid coronavirus concerns" ... not even Congressional voting is legit, under Covid lockdown?

"Ex-Nevada AG describes ballots 'piled up in apartments and trash cans and in hallways' due to mail-in voting" ... no such think as voting fraud?  Both parties want voting so messed up (see Dem Iowa Primary) that all election results have to go to court?

"Richard Grenell declassifies Flynn-Kislyak call transcripts before leaving post" ... same guy who declassified the secret transcripts of the House investigative committee that Congressman Adam Schiff was hiding.  Chad!
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on May 27, 2020, 01:39:05 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_mlUMw1IZ4

I'm not holding my breath, but apparently one of the four horsemen of the apocalypse galloping through town might make people vote with a little more wisdom than normal - a much-needed break from genius criteria like who they'd like to have a beer with or who has the most simplistic yet vague slogan.  Shame that it practically took the end of the world to get us there, if indeed we are there (if not, that would be even more shameful)

America needs to get its act together asap, and a lot of the stuff we need to do next year is stuff we needed to do 20 years ago - tackling global warming, getting out of the middle east, improving healthcare, improving infrastructure, saving the middle class from relentless class warfare, etc.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: trdsf on May 27, 2020, 05:17:56 AM
I'm not holding my breath, but apparently one of the four horsemen of the apocalypse galloping through town might make people vote with a little more wisdom than normal - a much-needed break from genius criteria like who they'd like to have a beer with or who has the most simplistic yet vague slogan.  Shame that it practically took the end of the world to get us there, if indeed we are there (if not, that would be even more shameful)

America needs to get its act together asap, and a lot of the stuff we need to do next year is stuff we needed to do 20 years ago - tackling global warming, getting out of the middle east, improving healthcare, improving infrastructure, saving the middle class from relentless class warfare, etc.
I'd like to know which two elections out of the past 18 they've gotten wrong, and how accurate their predictions were beyond just tagging the winner.  I'd also like to know where they got a 55% vote for the Oval Orifice, because while him winning isn't out of the question, him winning by a landslide ain't on the cards right now.  Current polling suggests that if it happens, it'd be another one like '16 -- lose the vote, win the states.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 27, 2020, 09:15:31 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_mlUMw1IZ4

I'm not holding my breath, but apparently one of the four horsemen of the apocalypse galloping through town might make people vote with a little more wisdom than normal - a much-needed break from genius criteria like who they'd like to have a beer with or who has the most simplistic yet vague slogan.  Shame that it practically took the end of the world to get us there, if indeed we are there (if not, that would be even more shameful)

America needs to get its act together asap, and a lot of the stuff we need to do next year is stuff we needed to do 20 years ago - tackling global warming, getting out of the middle east, improving healthcare, improving infrastructure, saving the middle class from relentless class warfare, etc.

We need Civil War.  Finish what the Republicans started ;-)  People still believe polls, still believe fake statistical models.  Losers.

Yes, we need to exterminate the middle class.  They are the true evil ;-)  Hated by both the upper and lower classes.  Bourgeoise ;-(

Global warming?   Just make it illegal for Dems to drive or heat/cool their homes.  A Mao jacket, a bicycle and a little red book of Bernie should be sufficient.  If we stop all driving, heating/cooling etc .. then we can get out of the Middle East, because we won't need oil/gas.  Shale oil is a fake out, financial prestidigitation by a broken financial system (we aren't paying up front the actual cost per barrel to extract it).  Healthcare?  Mandatory gym for the slaves.  Class warfare?  You mean the part where the lower classes prove how deplorable they are?
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 27, 2020, 09:23:18 AM
"YOUTUBE JUST ADMITTED TO CENSORING PEOPLE WHO INSULT THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY??! UNSURPRISING" ... Google (CIA), Twitter, Facebook (CIA again) and DNC all work for the CCP.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Sal1981 on May 27, 2020, 10:14:45 AM
"YOUTUBE JUST ADMITTED TO CENSORING PEOPLE WHO INSULT THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY??! UNSURPRISING" ... Google (CIA), Twitter, Facebook (CIA again) and DNC all work for the CCP.
If you type (or copypaste) "communist bandits" into any YouTube video comments the post is automatically deleted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vvy4Cwmie3o
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 27, 2020, 12:34:04 PM
Cutest Communist Dictator of all time?

"Cuomo granted immunity to nursing home executives, after big-money campaign donation: report" ... I consider this typical pol behavior.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Hydra009 on May 27, 2020, 01:41:31 PM
I'd like to know which two elections out of the past 18 they've gotten wrong
1968 (narrow Nixon victory) and 1976 (narrow Carter victory)  (Narrow in terms of popular vote, of course)

Quote
how accurate their predictions were beyond just tagging the winner.
This model just tags the winner with a rough estimate of the vote.

Quote
I'd also like to know where they got a 55% vote for the Oval Orifice
Based purely on economic data, that's where he was sitting prior to the pandemic.  Obviously, take it with a grain of salt.  It's not supposed to be some all-seeing oracle or comprehensive poll, it's just a rough educated guess, so we should be wary of unexpectedly high or low predictions.  I'm expecting a very close race similar to 2016, hopefully with different results.  We'll see.
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 27, 2020, 05:40:41 PM
"Trump Threatens To "Close Down" Twitter, Other Social Media To Stop Them From 'Rigging' 2020 Vote" .. the irony is so funny, it makes my sides hurt ;-)

"Canadian Judge Rules Against Huawei CFO, Clearing Way For Extradition" ... surprise to me.  Canada is a Chinese colony.

"Taiwan Draws Up "Humanitarian Assistance" Plan To Resettle Hong Kongers" ... good plan, to carry on the good fight against the CCP.

PS ...

"Trump To Sign Social Media Executive Order On Thursday After 'Fact-Check', Political Bias Exposed" ... which Pravda do you support?

"Flores: 7 Ways The DNC Will Use Contact-Tracers For Biden's Campaign To Oust Trump" ... basically Dem ward healers (old fashioned politics) will come directly to the homes of registered Dems, to help them vote "correctly".  I am not registered here, and not a Dem.  Otherwise I would greet at the door in the nude ;-)
Title: Re: The big ol' 2020 debate
Post by: Baruch on May 28, 2020, 10:09:07 AM
""Big Day For Fairness" - White House Plans To Empower FCC To Regulate American Social Media Giants" ... if media chooses one political side, expect to be opposed by the other political parties.  So if the Internet was regulated like other media, then when Kathy Griffin posts a threat to assassinate the President, then not only Kathy gets a visit from the Secret Service, but the heads of Twitter get the same visit?  Pretty much would kill "Atheist Forums" unless we continue to fly under the radar.

""Internet Platforms Aren't Arbiters Of Truth" - Zuckerberg Blasts Twitter For Tagging Trump Tweets As "Misinformation"" ... controlled opposition?  Don't believe Zuck for a minute!  All media is misinformation, particularly the political and commercial.

"DEMOCRATS ADMIT THEY ARE SCARED THAT THE ECONOMY WILL RECOVER AND HELP TRUMP" ... no problem, it will take at least a decade to recover from one year of government insanity.  We will have plenty of time to choose which President gets a Great Depression dumped on them ;-(